From foxmoth at qnet.com Sun Jan 1 00:52:44 2006 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Sun, 01 Jan 2006 00:52:44 -0000 Subject: Real child abuse/ Snape again In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 145677 > Alla: > > I definitely do, or more like they have the potentially huge > emotional power over their students, but we don't see them either > using or misusing it either because it is not important for the > story or because they don't misuse it. IMO of course. Pippin: Oh, I disagree. We do see other teachers abuse their power. I think telling a student he is fated to die is an abuse of power. So is not teaching him anything he couldn't learn from the lecture notes (a step could be eliminated there ;-)) But Harry doesn't hate Trelawney or Binns. He hates Snape, because Snape cheats him of approval. It's not wrong for Harry to want it, any more than it's wrong for Dudley to want sweets. But for Dudley to want them so much he takes candy from strangers is dangerous. Likewise, it's dangerous for Harry to want approval so much that he is provoked to rage whenever Snape withholds it. Snape isn't likely to hand out sweets, and he isn't ever likely to approve of Harry, but Harry is always lying or justifying himself and then getting furious when Snape sees through the lies and refuses to listen to the justifications. It's a rigged game, but Harry keeps playing it. > Pippin: > *Hogwarts* has huge emotional power over Harry. But Hogwarts > > overall was not an abusive situation for Harry or Neville, > IMO,except when Umbridge was in charge. > > Alla: > > Oh, but Hogwarts cannot exercises its power by itself, but only > through teachers, I think. Pippin: Nonetheless, Harry has an emotional attachment to the institution. That's canon. Most of his insecurity stems from his fear that he won't be considered a worthy student, and the same is true for Neville. > Alla: > > Since when students wanting and needing approval from their teacher > is a bad thing? It is certainly not in my opinion. IMO teacher who > does not want to give such approval is not a good one, NOT student > who wants one. But I know that it is ALL Harry and Neville's fault > and nothing is Snape's. :-) Pippin: And Harry has no responsibilities at all, although he has taken it on himself to defeat Voldemort? Harry has always had the choice of leaving the fight against Voldemort to other people. So has Neville. Preparation for such a contest is dangerous and difficult in itself -- it has to be. But it would be irresponsible to let Harry involve himself in the conflict unprepared. Harry can't shield his feelings with magic, so he is going to have to learn to do it the hard way, the real world way, by realizing that the only person whose approval he really needs is Harry Potter's. Emotional manipulation of the need for approval is one of the tools Voldemort uses, and the students need to know how it feels, just as they need to know how it feels to be manipulated by Imperius. Alla: I see nothing wrong in that Harry took a liking to Fake!Moody. I mean, of course it was bad within the story, BUT IMO there were no signs for Harry that man was exhibited abnormal behaviour. I think > that he behaved as a good teacher. IMO of course. Pippin: Except when he tortured one of Harry's classmates, helped Harry cheat on the Tri-wizard tournament, and lied about what he saw on the Marauder's Map. Alla: Except if he was showing Unforgivables in order to purposefully upset Neville of course, but personally I doubt it. For some strange reason I think Fake!Moody truly wanted them to learn about unforgivables. Pippin: Pardon my skepticism, but is it so hard to believe that a fanatical Death Eater who tortured a student and murdered his own father would be above deliberately upsetting Neville so he would have an excuse to give him a valuable book which he definitely wanted Neville to have? It's certainly canon that Riddle played on Ginny's need for approval to get her to pour her soul into the diary. Alla: > I think you argued in the past that Snape does a good thing by > Hermione, since she does not need teachers' approval anyway and does > better in the challenging environment, but she GLOWES when Lupin > praises her, therefore I don't think that Snape does Hermione any > good either. Pippin: That's what she's at school to learn, is it? Glowing? She got an O in potions but only an E in DADA, so I guess the examiners weren't impressed with her glowing ability either :-) Pippin From catlady at wicca.net Sun Jan 1 02:08:10 2006 From: catlady at wicca.net (Catlady (Rita Prince Winston)) Date: Sun, 01 Jan 2006 02:08:10 -0000 Subject: Parents / Peeves / Memory Charms / DD descendents / OneLiners/ Snape/ Abuse Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 145678 Pippin wrote in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/145480 : << the realization that the parent who goes to war does so knowing that he risks dying in battle, leaving his children alone. Molly acknowledges this in OOP, IIRC, and Lupin assures her the Order won't let her children starve. Well, the Order didn't let Harry starve, exactly, but Molly has a right to be concerned considering what did happen to him. But she didn't give up the fight, even after Arthur was nearly killed. I don't think James and Lily would have either, even if they knew that Harry was going to wind up with the Dursleys instead of Sirius. >> But they WOULD have made an effort to arrange a second-choice and third-choice guardian for Harry in case something happened to Sirius as well as to them. DB asked in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/145582 : << why does Dumbledore allow Peeves to stay at Hogwarts? >> http://www.quick-quote-quill.org/articles/2005/0705-tlc_mugglenet-anelli-2.htm says: << ES: Why does Dumbledore allow Peeves to stay in the castle? JKR: Can't get him out. ES: He's Dumbledore, he can do anything! JKR: No, no no no no. Peeves is like dry rot. You can try and eradicate it. It comes with the building. You're stuck. If you've got Peeves you're stuck. ES: But Peeves answers to Dumbledore - JKR: Allegedly. MA: Allegedly? JKR: Yeah. I see Peeves as like a severe plumbing problem in a very old building, and Dumbledore is slightly better with the spanner than most people, so he can maybe make it function better for a few weeks. Then it's going to start leaking again. >> Simon wrote in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/145596 : << Tom Riddle breaks a memory charm in between PoA and GoF, Bertha I think her name is. So I believe that Lockhart will get his memory back. >> The means that Voldie used to break the Memory Charm on Bertha "were powerful, and when [he] had extracted all useful information from her, her mind and body were both damaged beyond repair." Some listies think that means that Memory Charms are broken by torture in general or Cruciatis Curse in particular, but I think it means that there are spells or potions for breaking Memory Charms, but they have side effects that would result in Lockhart NOT being released from St Mungo's. Jen sig'ged in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/145610 : << keeping up her lonely campaign for the Dumbledore brothers to be descended from GG. >> My own desire is for Lily to be the great- or great-great grand- daughter of Dumbledore and his hypothetical late Muggle first wife. (Lily and I were born in 1950-something. My mother was born in 1920-something. Her mother, my grandma, was born in 1890-something. Her mother, my great-grandmother, died before I was born, and the pattern suggests she was born in 1860-something. Dumble, being 150 years old in the 1990s, was born in the 1840s and therefore old enough to be a daddy in the 1860s.) -----------------OT----------------------------- zeldaricdeau wrote in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/145629 : << looking back, I think Snape using a logic puzzle as his task was a clue. As Hermione says, most wizards aren't very adept at logic. But maybe a half-blooded wizard with ties to the muggle world would be? >> But many Muggles, including me, are terrible at logic. Geoff wrote in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/145485 : << More likely a film version of "the Four Loves" >> LOL at the disappointment of moviegoers who expect it to be a soap opera about choosing whom to marry and whether to be faithful. KathyO wrote in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/145509 : << This has been an exciting ride, each book giving us a bit more insight into the puzzle...but it's a puzzle we've been working on for years. Once you've completed the puzzle...what do you do then? Ouch! >> This is a forbidden "I agree!" post. ------------------SNAPE------------------------- Lupinlore wrote in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/145483 : << By the same token, I think we should remember that, as far as we know, [DUmbledore] has never revealed to Snape about the prophecy. >> Because Snape heard the Prophecy at the same time that Dumbledore did. Claudia wrote in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/145484 ; << when a Marauder (or anything concerning them) comes up he simply boils over, something he could never ever afford to let happen around Voldemort or his followers. >> Obsessive overwhelming hatred and resentment of some Order of the Phoenix members has got to be the SAFEST weakness to show around Voldemort and the Death Eaters -- some of them probably show the same! ------------------ABUSE---------------------- La Gatta Lucianese meowed in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/145627 : << never was I throwing-up afraid of one of my teachers. I often was of my mother. >> But there ARE cases of children who are throwing-up afraid of a nasty teacher. Miles wrote in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/145584 : << Another necessity for abuse is that they cause or could cause serious behavioural, cognitive, emotional, or mental disorders. We never saw any student of Snape's classes that suffers from any of this. >> To me, saying that x DID not happen is not the same as saying that x COULD NOT have happened. Alla wrote in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/145593 : << I am just arguing against the idea that people who DO see Snape as abuser somehow make "outlandish" arguments. >> I agree. Any notion that so MANY people come up with independently cannot be OUTLANDISH. ------------------- From greatraven at hotmail.com Sun Jan 1 05:12:17 2006 From: greatraven at hotmail.com (sbursztynski) Date: Sun, 01 Jan 2006 05:12:17 -0000 Subject: Punishments for the Dursleys In-Reply-To: <000001c60dd2$beaaddc0$a360a7ac@Overton> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 145679 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Corey Overton" wrote: > > > > Lupinlore: > We have a minor cottage industry developing coming up with suitable > fates for the Dursleys. There seem to be several that are plausible. > > > Corey here : > I hope Umbridge doesn't have any contact with the Dursleys. I > know they weren't the best family but there certainly better than > Umbridge. As for the Dursleys coming to Privet dr. I agree with Lupinlore when he says "They might be taken there" "And we might be given lines about their misadventures" The question is what could happen to them at Grimmald place? The house is vacant after. And there's not much magic in there any more. Oh I forgot about Blacks mother. I wonder how she'll react to muggles. As far as Kreature goes, I think he'll stay at Hogwarts. > Corey Sue here: The Dursleys might actually get on with Umbridge, especially after she tells them how she treated Harry. Dudley would be just the sort of boy she'd like, along the lines of the Slytherin "Inquisitorial squad". Aunt Petunia would have a fainting fit at Grimmauld Place, even after Molly's clean-up drive. > From bboyminn at yahoo.com Sun Jan 1 05:56:08 2006 From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Sun, 01 Jan 2006 05:56:08 -0000 Subject: The Dursleys and Being Nice and Civil In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 145680 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "lealess" wrote: > > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Steve" wrote: > > > > bboyminn: > > > > According to Ron, Ron and Hermione are going to be with Harry > > at the Dursley's house. Please, you must see the comic > > come-uppance potential in that? > > > > ... > > > > Just having Ron and Hermione there at the Dursley will be > > torturous nough for the Dursleys, but when Ron and Hermione > > expect civilized treatment that will just be too much. The > > frustration & intimidation alone represent a good deal of > > Karmic justice in my book. And if Privet Drive is attacked, > > and the Dursleys are forced to seek refuge at 12 Grimmauld > > Place, then I will be a happy camper. The will be justice > > enough for me. > > > > Just passing it along. > > Steve/bboyminn > > > lealess: > > I would actually like Ron and Hermione to behave civilly to > the Dursleys. I am sure that is not what they would expect, > however, as that has not been their experience with wizards. > > ...edited... > > ... So it would be nice if Hermione and Ron reversed this > trend, supported their friend but not at the expense of others, > and saved the Dursleys while they were at it. If Dudley survives > a potential attack on Privet Drive which is preceded by Hermione > and Ron's retribution on the Dursleys, it wouldn't surprise me to > see Dudley devote his life to eradicating wizards from England. > > lealess > bboyminn: I'm sure Ron and Hermione have every intention of being polite, civil, and even helpful to the Dursleys. I'm sure they have every intention of being nice unobtrusive undemanding guests, and I'm sure that's how things will stay as long as the Dursley's remain even marginally polite. However, I don't expect any marginal politeness on the part of the Dursleys to last for long, and I don't think Ron and Hermione will fancy it when the Dursleys try to bull and intimidate them the way the do Harry. Nor do I think Ron and Hermione will tolerate any continued ill treatment of Harry. The Dursley don't really have to be NICE to be treated civilly in return; in fact, polite indifference will do. But if they try to bull or intimidate, or whine and cry, and you know they will, they won't get far. Just a thought. Steve/bboyminn From bboyminn at yahoo.com Sun Jan 1 06:14:14 2006 From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Sun, 01 Jan 2006 06:14:14 -0000 Subject: Thestrals Again In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 145681 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "lagattalucianese" wrote: > > La Gatta Lucianese: > > Odd, in GoF.37, even though he has witnessed Cedric Diggory's > death, ...edited... It isn't until OotF that Harry is actually > able to see the thestrals. > > So, my question is, does it take a while for thestral-seeing to > set in, or did JKR drop a byte in there somewhere? ;D > bboyminn: Others have already answered you questions with quotes from JKR, but I want to add a side note. The 5 Stages of Grief: Denial, Anger, Bargaining, Depression, Acceptance At the end of GoF, Harry is still in a state of shock and very much in the denial stage of grieving. Yes, he knows it happened, but every subconsious fiber of his being is trying to deny it, to hope it was a dream or a mistake or a joke or anything but reality; even though as I say, consciously he does know it is reality. What the brain knows, the heart and soul don't alway know. Notice the second stage ANGER, and how do we find Harry a few weeks later? Angry at the world, angry at everyone and everything that even remotely gives him an excuse to be angry. Frequently the anger of grieving is again subconscious, and is directed at everything but the one place where it really belongs. This is especially true in young people, they feel and they feel very deeply, but they rarely recognise why, and they rarely direct that anger where it truly belongs. As a consequence of not recognising the source and direction of that anger, they lash out at those closest to them, whether friends, schoolmate, people walking down the street, or society in general. As Phineas Nigellus might say, teens have a tendency to feel tragically misunderstood. So, yes, it takes time to process death and make sense out of it. It takes time to accept the very thing you know to be true. And until that time has passed, you haven't accepted death into your heart and soul. Once that happens, you can see the Therstrals. Just passing it along. Steve/bboyminn From willsonkmom at msn.com Sun Jan 1 06:55:54 2006 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Sun, 01 Jan 2006 06:55:54 -0000 Subject: Real child abuse/ Snape again In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 145682 Alla: > I see nothing wrong in that Harry took a liking to Fake!Moody. I > mean, of course it was bad within the story, BUT IMO there were no > signs for Harry that man was exhibited abnormal behaviour. I think > that he behaved as a good teacher. IMO of course. Except if he was > showing Unforgivables in order to purposefully upset Neville of > course, but personally I doubt it. For some strange reason I think > Fake!Moody truly wanted them to learn about unforgivables. Potioncat: Do you mean, you understand why Harry was conned by Crouch!Moody? Not that it was OK? C!M himself says it is easy to manipulate the innocent (was that the word he used?) It was an act to get Harry to LV. Gives a new meaning to killing someone with kindness. He was only being kind or cool in order to get Harry's trust. His ultimate goal was get Harry killed and to advance his own standing with the Dark Lord. From katmac at katmac.cncdsl.com Sun Jan 1 07:23:03 2006 From: katmac at katmac.cncdsl.com (lagattalucianese) Date: Sun, 01 Jan 2006 07:23:03 -0000 Subject: Punishments for the Dursleys In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 145683 > > Sue here: > > The Dursleys might actually get on with Umbridge, especially after she tells them how she > treated Harry. Dudley would be just the sort of boy she'd like, along the lines of the > Slytherin "Inquisitorial squad". > La Gatta Lucianese: I think Uncle Vernon and Umbridge would get along like ham and eggs, myself. They could take turns yelling themselves purple at Mrs. Black. > > Aunt Petunia would have a fainting fit at Grimmauld Place, even after Molly's clean-up > drive. > La Gatta Lucianese: Or she might just think of it as job security. Drano in all the boggarts! Raid in all the corners! Polyester at all the windows! Shag carpeting everywhere! From vuurdame at xs4all.nl Sun Jan 1 10:06:05 2006 From: vuurdame at xs4all.nl (festuco) Date: Sun, 01 Jan 2006 10:06:05 -0000 Subject: Real child abuse/ Snape again In-Reply-To: <014101c60dab$48ce34c0$14b2a8c0@rechnerchen> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 145684 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Miles" wrote: > AFAIR I was the first one to ask for definitions of abuse and to bring in a > definition in order to structure the discussion. Later you introduced a > definition of emotional abuse - which is similar to the English and German > definitions I found so far - and tried to show Snape's actions as abuses of > this kind. > What you missed (and I neither think you intended to do nor that the reason > is a lack of personal expertise on your side) is to point out, that the kind > of relationship between abuser and abused when speaking of emotional abuse > has to meet special conditions, like trust, dependence, and exclusiveness. > These conditions, to speak of Harry, are met by Dumbledore, Sirius, maybe > Molly and Arthur - but never by Snape. Actually, I don't think this definition is completely right. A teacher can emotionally abuse a pupil, and I've seen the results of this. Was there trust? No. Was there dependence: certainly, there is always dependence in a teacher-child relationship. Was there exclusiveness: up to a point. There are teachers who are certainly able to emotionally abuse a child and who do so. Make the child the laughing stock of the class, making constantly derogative remarks, giving punishments far more severe than other children get, for lesser things or for no reason at all, looking for the weak spot and going for it again and again and again, every hour, every day. If the child is - how do I say this - authority minded this will have a huge impact, more than if they are able to shrug it off, get angry or have enough of self to not start believing all that. The Nevilles are much easier to intimidate by an authority figure than the Harrys, but it will take a rarely resilient child to come out of a truly emotionally abusive teacher-student relation unharmed. Yet I don't think Snape is abusive. He is nasty, but he never crosses the line into true abuse. He simply does not enough for that. True abuse would mean making derogatory remarks about Neville/Harry every couple of minutes. Deliberately chipping away at his self-confidence again and again every time they have potions. Giving random detentions as horrid as possible. And so on, and so on. Now we see Snape doing a little of that. And for Neville this is certainly not good. But true abuse is much, much worse. Could Snape be able of emotional abuse? Certainly. He knows how to wound and he has demonstrated he can be cruel. Does he do it. No, he does not enough for that. Gerry From mgrantwich at yahoo.com Sun Jan 1 14:48:03 2006 From: mgrantwich at yahoo.com (Magda Grantwich) Date: Sun, 1 Jan 2006 06:48:03 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Real child abuse/ Snape again In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20060101144803.85258.qmail@web53112.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 145685 --- festuco wrote: > But true abuse is much, much worse. Could Snape be able of > emotional abuse? Certainly. He knows how to wound and he has > demonstrated he can be cruel. Does he do it. No, he does not > enough for that. Exactly. If we consider what Snape could do if he really wanted to.... He could split up the trio and assign them different partners in potions class. Hermione/Millicent Bullstrode, Ron/Draco, and Harry/Crabbe-Goyle would be a fun five years of pre-NEWT classes, wouldn't you say? And despite his order that Hermione not help Neville, Snape doesn't move her away from Neville's side. (In some books it seems as if they're actually partners, right beside Ron/Harry as partners; then sometimes it's like the Trio are all together at one cauldron and Neville is on his own. But I assume the former is the usual situation.) Or if he really wanted to be hateful, Snape could put Neville and Draco together. That would be wonderful for Neville's emotional health, wouldn't it? And putting kids in assigned seats would not be seen as out of the ordinary, rather as done by teacher preference. He could even preface it with a high-minded speech about how important it was for the various Houses to mingle and learn to work together. The Trio feel quite free to have discussions about plot-issues in potions class and don't seem to be cowering in fear that they'll be caught. On the occasions when Snape does come down on them, they're always rather surprised. Since it seems that the child abuse issue is never going to go away (despite my fervent Christmas wish), it almost seems like it should be set up as a separate list so devotees can go at it with full force (my latest desperate New Years wish). Magda __________________________________________ Yahoo! DSL Something to write home about. Just $16.99/mo. or less. dsl.yahoo.com From richter at ridgenet.net Sun Jan 1 02:02:02 2006 From: richter at ridgenet.net (richter_kuymal) Date: Sun, 01 Jan 2006 02:02:02 -0000 Subject: Real child abuse/ Snape again In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 145686 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "pippin_999" wrote:... We do see other teachers abuse their power. > I think telling a student he is fated to die is an abuse of power. > So is not teaching him anything he couldn't learn from the > lecture notes (a step could be eliminated there ;-)) But > Harry doesn't hate Trelawney or Binns. He hates Snape, because > Snape cheats him of approval. It's not wrong for Harry to want > it, any more than it's wrong for Dudley to want sweets. But > for Dudley to want them so much he takes candy from strangers > is dangerous. Likewise, it's dangerous for Harry to want > approval so much that he is provoked to rage whenever Snape > withholds it. > > Snape isn't likely to hand out sweets, and he isn't ever likely > to approve of Harry, but Harry is always lying or justifying himself > and then getting furious when Snape sees through the lies and > refuses to listen to the justifications. == but then how does one justify Snape in the first class encounter? "our new CELEBRITY..Tell me Potter...." Now Snape is perfectly aware that Harry does NOT have any wizard education. Of all the students in the class, only Hermione seems to know the answer. Deliberately choosing to highlight Harry in this way is at the least, cruel. Nor is this all. Snape accuses Harry of not telling Neville about when to put in quills when one of Neville's potions explodes. This isn't about "approval" or any lying on Harry's part. This is about a teacher deliberately choosing to single out a student for harassment. In the Quiddich match, Snape again abuses his authority -- if he can't referee fairly, he should not referee. Approval in the form of grades is something Snape is supposed to provide when a student does well, yet we see him providing zeros in cases where it is not deserved. Harassing Harry, Neville and playing favorites with those in his own house certainly strike me as abuse of power, if nothing else. --- PAR From algebrarocks at msn.com Sun Jan 1 02:09:37 2006 From: algebrarocks at msn.com (algebrarocks555) Date: Sun, 01 Jan 2006 02:09:37 -0000 Subject: Snape/Longbottoms/Riddle/Tonks/Dumbledore/Horcrux/R.A.B. Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 145687 I've just done a rereading of the Half-Blood Prince and got a lot of questions from it. For one, does Snape know about the Horcruxes? I mean, he was the one to heal Dumbledore's hand. Snape must have been curious. Is it possible that Dumbledore could have told him? And I don't think that Dumbledore could have trusted Snape that easily just because Snape said he was remorseful for telling Voldemort about the prophecy. I wonder if Dumbledore knew something else about him that made him trust Snape so. Another question, on her site, JKR said that Neville had the same chances of being the "Boy Who Lived". If so, why did Dumbledore choose to protect the Potters? Why not the Longbottoms? Or were they protected also? In Chapter 13, The Secret Riddle, on page 268, it mentioned the two kids, Amy Benson and Dennis Bishop, on the outing with Tom Riddle to the cave. I am really curious to know what he could have shown them that scared them so much. And while we're on Riddle, I have lots of questions about horcruxes. First of all, there's the potion in the basin. How would Voldemort have gotten the horcrux without the potion affecting him? Does he have an antidote or something? And when Dumbledore was drinking the potion, what did he see? What caused him so much pain and fear? And why didn't he just dump it over into the lake? And of course there's R.A.B. How did he/she get the horcrux out of the basin? The same way as Dumbledore? And did R.A.B. succeed in destroying the horcrux? Just curious, Tianlu From ornawn at 013.net Sun Jan 1 16:36:24 2006 From: ornawn at 013.net (ornadv) Date: Sun, 01 Jan 2006 16:36:24 -0000 Subject: The Dursleys and Being Nice and Civil Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 145688 > > bboyminn: > > > > According to Ron, Ron and Hermione are going to be with Harry > > at the Dursley's house. Please, you must see the comic > > come-uppance potential in that? Orna: Especially, since Ron and Hermione are off-age wizards, and allowed to do magic...But somehow I think that will be enough to restraint the Dursleys, as far as Harry is concerned. OTOH it opens a lot of scenarios for somehow understanding the Petunia riddle more. Hermione, being a muggle, a girl, and therefore somehow less frightening to her, might "do the job". Orna From zarleycat at sbcglobal.net Sun Jan 1 16:38:30 2006 From: zarleycat at sbcglobal.net (kiricat4001) Date: Sun, 01 Jan 2006 16:38:30 -0000 Subject: The Locket and Mundungus In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 145689 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Steve" wrote: > > > Marianne: > > I agree with Gerry. I think Sirius made it quite clear that > > he desired a total disassociation with anything that reminded > > him of his family's past. And, since Sirius held these objects > > in such low esteeem, they wouldn't represent something of value > > to Harry. Even when Harry got angry with Dung for stealing the > > silver goblets in HBP, he cooled down somewhat when he remembered > > that Sirius didn't care for them. > > > > bboyminn: > > I see your point and it is certainly valid, but I'm not sure I agree > completely. History is always being written; today's headlines are > tomorrows history. While Sirius's family may have had an unpleasant > view of what it meant to be a 'Black', Sirius re-wrote that history. > He gave new value and meaning to the 'Black' name. > > To Sirius the many objects he purged represented his family and their > dark history, but to Harry, those very objects represent Sirius and > the new values and history he gave to the 'Black' family. > > When Harry sat down to dinner in the Black house, and ate off of > plates and drank from goblets with the Black family crest, he would be > thinking of Sirius's bravery and loyalty, and not of Sirius's 'witch' > of a mother. > > So, while the span of Black family history may be dark, it ended with > a very bright and brave spot. It ended with a new set of values that > gave the name a whole new meaning. It is because of this that those > artifacts would symbolize Sirius to Harry. Marianne: I'll concede that Harry might indeed come to view some of those Black artifacts in the way you describe some time in the future - after he's had time to reflect, time to mourn and time to put the whole issue of what he's going through now as a teenager in a deadly battle with Voldemort behind him. I'm assuming, of course, that Harry lives beyond the final showdown. Right now, though, Harry is too wrapped up in events to be able to make that shift in thinking, IMO. His thoughts about inheriting 12 GP in Chap 3: "Harry never wanted to set foot in number twelve, Gimmauld Place again if he could help it. He thought he would be haunted forever by the memory of Sirius prowling its dark musty rooms alone, imprisoned within the place he had wanted so desperately to leave." With those feelings, Harry has a long way to go to make the connection of the Black possessions as something that could be used to mark and honor the change in the family as represented by its last son. Which is not to say that Harry might not one day wish he had one of those old silver goblets to show his own children when telling them about Sirius. But, right now, they've got too many negative connotations to them. Marianne From hambtty at triad.rr.com Sun Jan 1 16:45:20 2006 From: hambtty at triad.rr.com (hambtty) Date: Sun, 01 Jan 2006 16:45:20 -0000 Subject: Clever DD and why I think it is Dudley Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 145690 When Petunia Dursley reacted so strongly to the news that in the WW children come of age at 17 not 18, I couldn't help but wonder why. Why did JKR want us to know that Petunia was shocked and remained so for the rest of DD's visit? She described several physical observations Harry made about his aunt in that chapter that puzzled him. What does it matter to her, to her family? She should have been thrilled for Harry to leave a year earlier than expected. Then there is DD's inference that at least they didn't mistreat Harry as badly as Dudley. Did DD trick Petunia into taking Harry in by promising her or dare I say making an Unbreakable Vow? She clearly thought Harry must live with them until age 18, DD knows muggles consider their 18th birthday as coming of age. DD could have promised that Dudley would be "protected" from becoming a wizard until his 18th birthday as long as Harry still called their house home until his coming of age. Then at 18 Dudley would lose his magic forever ? Dudley is a month older than Harry so in Petunia's mind he would be 18 before Harry came of age. If DD worded it just right then that would give Dudley one year to discover he too is a wizard. When Harry leaves will Dudley discover his magic? Then I remembered a quote from JKR hinting that someone will become magical at a late age. Late age? What could be a late age ? surely 17 is considered late in the WW. I know most think that it will be Mrs. Figg but surely she would have discovered her magic, if any by now. As for me, I think it is Dudley. From rstiegel at yahoo.com Sun Jan 1 04:03:57 2006 From: rstiegel at yahoo.com (Rachael) Date: Sun, 01 Jan 2006 04:03:57 -0000 Subject: Who was with Voldemort at GH? /quick PoA question./Real child abuse In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 145691 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Kathy" wrote: > > > See my post 145203 - I know it was Snape at GH. It's the only thing > that ties everything together...it gives us the reason Dumbledore > trusts Snape - and the reason Snape is tied to Harry. It's the only > logical answer. Hi, my name is Rachael. I am new to the list and I thought I would add my two knuts about Snape being at Godric's Hollow... I like this theory because I don't see why Voldemort would give Lily a choice about whether or not she would live or die unless there was someone else there giving him a reason to do this. Giving Lily this choice is essential to the whole story because it relates back to Harry's blood and the gleam of triumph etc.. DD explains the significance of Harry's blood as follows... "I am speaking, of course, of the fact that your mother died to save you. She gave you a lingering protection he never expected, a protection that flows through your veins to this very day." (OOTP 836) I don't think Harry's blood would be anything special if Voldemort had just killed Lily without giving her the choice. If that were the case Harry would have receved potection from his father's death too. And because I don't think Voldemort would naturally offer this, I think Snape(or someone) must be involved. This means that Snape could be responsible for Harry's most important source of protection. I am sure someone has mentioned it before, but this statement is so strangely worded that I can't believe it isn't there for a reason: "Professors McGonagall and Moody kept them working until the very last second of their classes too, and Snape, of course, would no sooner let them play games in class than adopt Harry." (GOF 392) Snape being at Godric's Hollow and feeling some sort of responsibility for Harry would be a nice explanation. However, I do not feel that this theory provides the sole reason DD trusted Snape because Snape came to DD with this reason before the attack on the Potters. I am starting to think Snape's reason had absolutely nothing to do with the Potters whatsoever. Rachael From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Sun Jan 1 17:11:13 2006 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Sun, 01 Jan 2006 17:11:13 -0000 Subject: Real child abuse/ Snape again In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 145692 > Pippin: > Oh, I disagree. We do see other teachers abuse their power. > I think telling a student he is fated to die is an abuse of power. Alla: Yeah, sure. I will agree with that, and if Trelawney would have done it every single lesson, I would even agree with you that it is an emotional abuse. Pippin: Likewise, it's dangerous for Harry to want > approval so much that he is provoked to rage whenever Snape > withholds it. Alla: I think he does not want approval anymore that any student wants an approval from the teacher for the job done well. IMO of course. > Pippin: > And Harry has no responsibilities at all, although he has taken it on > himself to defeat Voldemort? Harry has always had the choice of > leaving the fight against Voldemort to other people. So has Neville. > Preparation for such a contest is dangerous and difficult in itself -- > it has to be. But it would be irresponsible to let Harry involve himself > in the conflict unprepared. Harry can't shield his feelings with magic, > so he is going to have to learn to do it the hard way, the real world > way, by realizing that the only person whose approval he really > needs is Harry Potter's. Alla: At eleven Harry did not involve himself in any fight; he just arrived in a new school and in the whole new world and instead of some kind of support had to endure a vicious attack from Snape, IMO. He is a Potions teacher, NOT a drill instructor, in fact IMO we saw how miserably he failed at the role of drill instructor of Occlumency. Now, post HBP I am even thinking sometimes that maybe all that time Snape wanted to have Harry expelled because he knew about Harry's role in the fight and did not want Harry to learn those skills. Just speculating here of course. > > Alla: > I see nothing wrong in that Harry took a liking to Fake!Moody. > I mean, of course it was bad within the story, BUT IMO there were no > signs for Harry that man was exhibited abnormal behavior. I think > > that he behaved as a good teacher. IMO of course. > > Pippin: > Except when he tortured one of Harry's classmates, helped Harry > cheat on the Tri-wizard tournament, and lied about what he saw > on the Marauder's Map. Alla: Pippin, I did not said that he did not behave as a DE in reality, but I DO think that he played a role of good teacher well, of course but for Neville, if that is true. Torturing Draco - sorry, I will sign it off to rough justice again and I think that Real!Moody would not have been above doing it. IMO of course. And two other incidents IMO had nothing to do with his teaching activities, but Death Eater activities, which he definitely performed splendidly, IMO. > Alla: > Except if he was showing Unforgivables in order to purposefully > upset Neville of course, but personally I doubt it. For some strange > reason I think Fake!Moody truly wanted them to learn about > unforgivables. > > Pippin: > Pardon my skepticism, but is it so hard to believe that a fanatical > Death Eater who tortured a student and murdered his own father > would be above deliberately upsetting Neville so he would have > an excuse to give him a valuable book which he definitely wanted > Neville to have? Alla: Hard to believe? No, of course not, but since we KNOW that he taught Harry how to resist Imperius for real, I think it is also a possibility that he had some other reasons to teach Unforgivables, which do not include abusing Neville. But of course it is a possibility that he did abuse Neville and then I will take my statement of him behaving as a good teacher back OR it is also a possibility that Dumbledore REALLY wanted them to learn about Unforgivables, no? I think we just don't know either way. So, of course in reality fake! Moody was not a good teacher - good teachers do not plan kidnapping and assassination attempts, BUT IMO Harry could not see any sings that man is dangerous. > Pippin: > That's what she's at school to learn, is it? Glowing? She got an O in > potions but only an E in DADA, so I guess the examiners weren't > impressed with her glowing ability either :-) > Alla: Hermione is in school to learn that when you do your job well, you will not get the grade that you are supposed to get? Is that what you are arguing? Gerry: > Actually, I don't think this definition is completely right. A teacher > can emotionally abuse a pupil, and I've seen the results of this. Was > there trust? No. Was there dependence: certainly, there is always > dependence in a teacher-child relationship. Was there exclusiveness: > up to a point. There are teachers who are certainly able to > emotionally abuse a child and who do so. Alla: Absolutely. That is exactly what I was trying to say. Based on Miles' definition it seems to me that teacher can never abuse the child, because the teacher does not have the same kind of emotional connection with the child as parent does, and that argument I find myself in a very strong disagreement with. Gerry: > Yet I don't think Snape is abusive. He is nasty, but he never crosses > the line into true abuse. He simply does not enough for that. True > abuse would mean making derogatory remarks about Neville/Harry every > couple of minutes. Now we see Snape doing a > little of that. And for Neville this is certainly not good. But true > abuse is much, much worse. Could Snape be able of emotional abuse? > Certainly. He knows how to wound and he has demonstrated he can be > cruel. Does he do it. No, he does not enough for that. Alla: Oh, you see, if we were discussing RL situation AND I knew for sure that indeed Snape only does what he does sometimes, I may have found myself more in agreement with you (although I happen to think that he does enough as it is, but your argument makes sense to me). Since we do discuss book series, I think that what we see how many characters behave is a sign of pattern, not just isolated situations. Does it make sense? We do NOT see many Potions classes and my interpretation is that there is no reason to believe that Snape behaves any differently to Harry, Neville or Hermione than how he acts in the classes we see. IMO only of course. And I think JKR gives us hints that in the classes that we do not see Snape does NOT behave any differently. For example, after Boggart scene narrator remarks that Snape seemed to be bullying Neville worse than ever. We do not see all those classes, but we know that narrator observed the pattern,IMO. PAR: Nor is this all. Snape accuses Harry of not > telling Neville about when to put in quills when one of Neville's > potions explodes. This isn't about "approval" or any lying on > Harry's part. This is about a teacher deliberately choosing to > single out a student for harassment. Alla: I think that extent of Snape's cruelty in this accident is highlighted lately, during Boggart lesson, when Snape punishes Hermione for helping Neville. So, no matter what they do - they are bound to loose, I guess. So, I think Snape could absolutely care less about Neville's education, since he does not want other students either helping or not helping him. I guess he is perfectly satisfied with him being the one in charge and being able to bully those who are weaker than him. Good teacher? How about being consistent and letting the other students know how do you want to deal with Neville, if nothing else? IMO anyway. JMO, Alla From coverton at netscape.com Sun Jan 1 14:27:57 2006 From: coverton at netscape.com (corey_over) Date: Sun, 01 Jan 2006 14:27:57 -0000 Subject: compairing Scrimgeour to Fudge. Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 145693 Hi every one. Corey again. I'm going to try to compair Rufus Scrimgeour to Fudge. Why I think Scrimgeour is better than Fudge was. 1. He fought dark wisards for most of his life. 2. Scrimgeour is more decisive than Fudge as Dumbledore said in HBP chapter 3. 3. Scrimgeour had security at Hogwarts where as Fudge I don't think would have done very well at this. 4. Scrimgeour has made his mistakes ie puting Stan Stunpike in Azkaban. That was admitedly stupid. but I think he's is a better minister than was Fudge. Fudge was after all sacked. Not saying that Scrimgeour won't be but if Scrimgeour is sacked who will take over next? Just some stuff to think about. Please lets pray to the bookgods that if Scrimgeour is sacked that Umbridge won't be Minister. That would be a nightmare. Just some thoughts. Your fellow list member Corey leaving for now. From a_svirn at yahoo.com Sun Jan 1 17:39:04 2006 From: a_svirn at yahoo.com (a_svirn) Date: Sun, 01 Jan 2006 17:39:04 -0000 Subject: Real child abuse/ Snape again In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 145695 Miles: the kind > > of relationship between abuser and abused when speaking of emotional > abuse > > has to meet special conditions, like trust, dependence, and > exclusiveness. > > These conditions, to speak of Harry, are met by Dumbledore, Sirius, > maybe > > Molly and Arthur - but never by Snape. > > Gerry: > Actually, I don't think this definition is completely right. A teacher > can emotionally abuse a pupil, and I've seen the results of this. Was > there trust? No. Was there dependence: certainly, there is always > dependence in a teacher-child relationship. Was there exclusiveness: > up to a point. There are teachers who are certainly able to > emotionally abuse a child and who do so. Make the child the laughing > stock of the class, making constantly derogative remarks, giving > punishments far more severe than other children get, for lesser things > or for no reason at all, looking for the weak spot and going for it > again and again and again, every hour, every day. a_svirn: You are describing bulling, not emotional abuse. For bulling to qualify as emotional abuse the relationship between teacher and student should meet the conditions Miles named. Snape may be a bully, but he does not wield any emotional power over Harry and Neville. Or, at least, there is no apparent reason why they should feel any kind of emotional dependence on him. From a_svirn at yahoo.com Sun Jan 1 18:06:00 2006 From: a_svirn at yahoo.com (a_svirn) Date: Sun, 01 Jan 2006 18:06:00 -0000 Subject: Real child abuse/ Snape again In-Reply-To: <20060101144803.85258.qmail@web53112.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 145697 > Since it seems that the child abuse issue is never going to go away > (despite my fervent Christmas wish), it almost seems like it should > be set up as a separate list so devotees can go at it with full force > (my latest desperate New Years wish). > > Magda a_svirn: My, that seems like a strong sentiment indeed. If you don't care for the thread why even bother to contribute? Just curious. From bboyminn at yahoo.com Sun Jan 1 18:29:03 2006 From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Sun, 01 Jan 2006 18:29:03 -0000 Subject: The Dursleys and Being Nice and Civil In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 145698 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "ornadv" wrote: > > > > bboyminn: > > > > > > According to Ron, Ron and Hermione are going to be with > > > Harry at the Dursley's house. Please, you must see the > > > comic come-uppance potential in that? > > > Orna: > Especially, since Ron and Hermione are off-age wizards, and > allowed to do magic...But somehow I think that will be enough > to restraint the Dursleys, as far as Harry is concerned. OTOH > it opens a lot of scenarios for somehow understanding the > Petunia riddle more. Hermione, being a muggle, a girl, and > therefore somehow less frightening to her, might "do the job". > > Orna > bboyminn: Well, I'm drifting away from canon now and into the realm of pure specuation, but her is one thing I want to happen in the next book. I want Harry to ask to see the Letter Dumbledore left with him when he was left on the Dursley's doorstep. I think it would give us all a lot of insight into what is going on. In addition, I want Harry to insist that Petunia show him any and all artifacts in her possession that are related to Lily. There may be letters or keepsake objects. I also wonder whether Harry will have to force/intimidate these object out of Petunia, or if she will give them willingly. More to the central thread, I think you are right, the whole reason for Ron and Hermione to be at the Dursley house is to expand on Petunia's backstory. I can think of no other reason. Just passing it along. Steve/bboyminn From katmac at katmac.cncdsl.com Sun Jan 1 18:32:31 2006 From: katmac at katmac.cncdsl.com (lagattalucianese) Date: Sun, 01 Jan 2006 18:32:31 -0000 Subject: Real child abuse/ Snape again In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 145699 > ... > > Yet I don't think Snape is abusive. He is nasty, but he never crosses > the line into true abuse. He simply does not enough for that. True > abuse would mean making derogatory remarks about Neville/Harry every > couple of minutes. Deliberately chipping away at his self-confidence > again and again every time they have potions. Giving random detentions > as horrid as possible. And so on, and so on. Now we see Snape doing a > little of that. And for Neville this is certainly not good. But true > abuse is much, much worse. Could Snape be able of emotional abuse? > Certainly. He knows how to wound and he has demonstrated he can be > cruel. Does he do it. No, he does not enough for that. > > Gerry > La Gatta Lucianese: I think you are right on the money, Gerry. It's a matter of focus. The abuser's main focus in the relationship with the child is *abusing*. That is the factor that defines the relationship. I can remember times when my mother couldn't wait for me to get home from school because she had thought up some new nastiness she wanted to try out on me. They *enjoy* what they're doing, in fact it's almost like a narcotic they need to get through the day. Snape's main focus is teaching his students potions. His nastiness is *reactive*; that is, he doesn't, except for that first day in SS, take the initiative. He *reacts* to things the students say and do that irritate him--Harry's in-your-face antagonism, Neville's incompetence (in all fairness, I think I would find Neville a bit trying myself), Hermione's know-it-all self-promotion. He is easily irritated; he hates the world, and it doesn't take much to set him off, but he does need to be set off. His hostility beyond that seems to be based mainly on the house the student is in, not anything personal about the student; you can hear the relish in his voice when he says, "Ten points from Gryffindor." And I think his hatred of Gryffindor is based on very real experiences of extreme abuse in his own youth. From hambtty at triad.rr.com Sun Jan 1 18:33:46 2006 From: hambtty at triad.rr.com (hambtty) Date: Sun, 01 Jan 2006 18:33:46 -0000 Subject: What demolished the Potter's house at GH? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 145700 This has been bothering me for some time. Then when I learned about the Unbreakable Vow in HBP it came to me, LV offered to make an UV with Snape to spare Lily Potter. Snape did not know of the Horcruxes but LV knew even an UV would not kill him - he tricked Snape. Why I don't know for Snape was, at that time, a loyal servant to LV - that, I admit is a huge flaw in my theory. But I am convinced that more than a deflected AK was at work that night - the power of the broken UV helped create VaporMort and destroyed the house. Afterall we saw the AK bounce around the Ministry of Magic and in the graveyard without mass destruction, why then would it destroy a house? From lealess at yahoo.com Sun Jan 1 18:43:50 2006 From: lealess at yahoo.com (lealess) Date: Sun, 01 Jan 2006 18:43:50 -0000 Subject: The Dursleys and Being Nice and Civil In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 145701 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Steve" wrote: > > I'm sure Ron and Hermione have every intention of being polite, > civil, and even helpful to the Dursleys. I'm sure they have every > intention of being nice unobtrusive undemanding guests, and I'm sure > that's how things will stay as long as the Dursley's remain even > marginally polite. However, I don't expect any marginal politeness > on the part of the Dursleys to last for long, and I don't think Ron > and Hermione will fancy it when the Dursleys try to bull and > intimidate them the way the do Harry. Nor do I think Ron and > Hermione will tolerate any continued ill treatment of Harry. > > The Dursley don't really have to be NICE to be treated civilly in > return; in fact, polite indifference will do. But if they try to > bull or intimidate, or whine and cry, and you know they will, they > won't get far. > > Just a thought. > Steve/bboyminn > Actually, I do think that the Dursleys will get their comeuppance, and it will fit into the other scenarios we have seen. Hermione's not one to hold back, for one thing. She can be self-righteous and has been shown to act to protect Harry without any other thought. If the Dursleys are uncivil, they will get slammed for it because Harry's friends will feel it is their right to do so. Is it right, though? In the morality of the books, frankly, it is. How many characters are ethically "straight," examining actions beforehand, questioning them, and explaining their consequences afterwards? Arthur is really the only one I can think of who does this. Remus prevaricates, Molly fulminates, Dumbledore obfuscates. The Ministry is corrupt, families are horribly flawed, adults will put children into dangerous situations or neglect them. Power is everything. The wizarding world is remarkably Hobbesian. If the Dursleys are set upon by Death Eaters and saved by the superior magical children, perhaps some readers will cheer: that will teach them. How did they feel when Dudley was attacked by a Dementor? I was horrified for him. It wasn't poetic justice. It was another example of the "not nice" aspects of the Potterverse, the kind of thing that spawns endless "dark" fanfiction, the stuff that has me shaking my head wondering why people want to lovingly examine the pain and brutality which is all too prevalent in real life. I appreciate that Rowling presents the "not nice" aspects of life in her books, but I wonder if she simply accepts injustice and cruelty more than wants to change them. Arthur's Muggle protection laws, Dumbledore's detachment, Remus' reason, Molly's scolding: all of these seem to be ineffectual. We are left with something called "love" which appears to me to be sacrificing oneself more than acting with generosity towards others in everyday life. So, I am not naive about how things happen in the HP books, and what is likely to happen. I just don't completely accept the what I perceive to be the limited ethics underlying the books. (I love the twins, by the way, not for their pranks, but for their anti-authoritarianism. But by pranking and creating a righteous excuse for it, they become a kind of authority of their own, one which can't be legitimately countered. Vigilante justice has consequences, often not the ones intended.) lealess From luckdragon64 at yahoo.ca Sun Jan 1 19:06:04 2006 From: luckdragon64 at yahoo.ca (Bee Chase) Date: Sun, 1 Jan 2006 14:06:04 -0500 (EST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Clever DD and why I think it is Dudley In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20060101190604.74805.qmail@web53305.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 145702 hambtty wrote: When Petunia Dursley reacted so strongly to the news that in the WW children come of age at 17 not 18, I couldn't help but wonder why. Why did JKR want us to know that Petunia was shocked and remained so for the rest of DD's visit? She described several physical observations Harry made about his aunt in that chapter that puzzled him. What does it matter to her, to her family? She should have been thrilled for Harry to leave a year earlier than expected. Then there is DD's inference that at least they didn't mistreat Harry as badly as Dudley. Did DD trick Petunia into taking Harry in by promising her or dare I say making an Unbreakable Vow? She clearly thought Harry must live with them until age 18, DD knows muggles consider their 18th birthday as coming of age. DD could have promised that Dudley would be "protected" from becoming a wizard until his 18th birthday as long as Harry still called their house home until his coming of age. Then at 18 Dudley would lose his magic forever ? Dudley is a month older than Harry so in Petunia's mind he would be 18 before Harry came of age. If DD worded it just right then that would give Dudley one year to discover he too is a wizard. When Harry leaves will Dudley discover his magic? Then I remembered a quote from JKR hinting that someone will become magical at a late age. Late age? What could be a late age ? surely 17 is considered late in the WW. I know most think that it will be Mrs. Figg but surely she would have discovered her magic, if any by now. As for me, I think it is Dudley. Luckdragon: Sorry, but Jo has already dispelled this idea. See quote below. Is there more to Dudley than meets the eye? No. [Laughter]. What you see is what you get. I am happy to say that he is definitely a character without much back story. He is just Dudley. The next book, Half Blood Prince, is the least that you see of the Dursleys. You see them quite briefly. You see them a bit more in the final book, but you don?t get a lot of Dudley in book six?very few lines. I am sorry if there are Dudley fans out there, but I think you need to look at your priorities if it is Dudley that you are looking forward to. --------------------------------- Find your next car at Yahoo! Canada Autos [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com Sun Jan 1 19:57:38 2006 From: HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com (HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com) Date: 1 Jan 2006 19:57:38 -0000 Subject: Weekly Chat, 1/1/2006, 1:00 pm Message-ID: <1136145458.15.33402.m29@yahoogroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 145703 Reminder from the Calendar of HPforGrownups http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/cal Weekly Chat Sunday January 1, 2006 1:00 pm - 1:00 pm (This event repeats every week.) Notes: Don't forget, chat happens today, 11 am Pacific, 2 pm Eastern, 7 pm UK time. Chat times do not change for Daylight Saving/Summer Time. Chat generally goes on for about 5 hours, but can last as long as people want it to last. To get into Chat, just go to the group online: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups and click on "Chat" in the lefthand menu. If you have problems with this, go to http://www.yahoo.com and in the bottom box on the left side of the page click on "Chat". Once you're logged into any room, type /join *g.HPforGrownups ; this should take you right in. If you have an Set up birthday reminders! http://us.rd.yahoo.com/cal_us/rem/?http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/cal?v=9&evt_type=13 Copyright 2006 Yahoo! Inc. All Rights Reserved. http://www.yahoo.com Privacy Policy: http://privacy.yahoo.com/ Terms of Service: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From rdas at facstaff.wisc.edu Sun Jan 1 19:57:49 2006 From: rdas at facstaff.wisc.edu (susanbones2003) Date: Sun, 01 Jan 2006 19:57:49 -0000 Subject: Real child abuse/ Snape again In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 145704 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "pippin_999" wrote: > > Lots of snipped material here. Post below. > > > Pippin: > > *Hogwarts* has huge emotional power over Harry. But Hogwarts > > > overall was not an abusive situation for Harry or Neville, > > IMO,except when Umbridge was in charge. > > > > > Alla: Snipped liberally! > > > > Oh, but Hogwarts cannot exercises its power by itself, but only > > through teachers, I think. > > Pippin: > Nonetheless, Harry has an emotional attachment to the institution. > That's canon. Most of his insecurity stems from his fear that he won't> be considered a worthy student, and the same is true for Neville. > >More Snips Jen writes: What you two keep saying without saying is that Harry is emotionally attached to "safe" Hogwarts, a Hogwarts run by Dumbledore. Remember when Dumbledore was sent away in COS and how the atmosphere changed so completely (never mind Snape's true motives towards Harry)? And under Umbridge, Hogwarts again became a very unsafe, non-nurturing place, never mind Binns or Trelawney's behavior. Harry, it seems, could handle anything anyone dished out as long as DD was presiding over the situation, the ultimate authority albeit. And now that DD is no more, Harry won't be going back. Hogwarts is just as unsafe (in much more serious ways than Snape ever tried to be)as the rest of the WW. Small point but it kept niggling at me. Jen D From manawydan at ntlworld.com Sun Jan 1 20:05:13 2006 From: manawydan at ntlworld.com (manawydan) Date: Sun, 1 Jan 2006 20:05:13 -0000 Subject: [HPforGrownups] DD descendents References: <1136109773.1321.30451.m19@yahoogroups.com> Message-ID: <000c01c60f0e$aec458e0$704b6d51@f3b7j4> No: HPFGUIDX 145705 Catlady wrote: > My own desire is for Lily to be the great- or great-great grand- > daughter of Dumbledore and his hypothetical late Muggle first wife. > (Lily and I were born in 1950-something. My mother was born in > 1920-something. Her mother, my grandma, was born in 1890-something. > Her mother, my great-grandmother, died before I was born, and the > pattern suggests she was born in 1860-something. Dumble, being 150 > years old in the 1990s, was born in the 1840s and therefore old > enough to be a daddy in the 1860s.) Generations in the RW are, as you rightly say, about 30 years. But, given the longer wizarding life span (and I'm using Griselda Marchbanks as my yardstick - she has to be in her early 200s to have examined Dumbledore in his schooldays in the 1850s), if a wizarding generation was 30 years, and assuming for the sake of simplicity - everyone marries and has two children, and - having surviving direct ancestors keeps you in touch with more distant cousins who also descend from those ancestors then when someone is born in the wizarding world, they have 16,254 living relatives (including relatives by marriage), from their 128 6-times great grandparents aged around 180 down to 4096 6th cousins 6 times removed who are born at the same time that they are! Canon is silent on the point, but I suspect that if that was the case, then the WW would be far more a family/clan based society than it seems to be - the Hogwarts students don't seem to have any more living relatives than comparative RW students. That would suggest to me that a generation is around 90 years in the WW to allow for the longer lifespans )obviously, given shorter Muggle lives, a mixed marriage would have children earlier and there would be, as in our own world, a spread of parental ages around the average (from James and Lily, who had Harry very young, to James's own parents, who had him very late). hwyl Ffred O Benryn wleth hyd Luch Reon Cymru yn unfryd gerhyd Wrion Gwret dy Cymry yghymeiri From willsonkmom at msn.com Sun Jan 1 20:46:09 2006 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Sun, 01 Jan 2006 20:46:09 -0000 Subject: C!M Imperius (was Re: Real child abuse/ Snape again In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 145706 Alla wrote >I think > that he behaved as a good teacher. IMO of course. Except if he was > showing Unforgivables in order to purposefully upset Neville of > course, but personally I doubt it. For some strange reason I think > Fake!Moody truly wanted them to learn about unforgivables. Potioncat: I happened to be back in 2002 and found this comment by Eloise in post 336329 *********************************************************** > Regarding Crouch/Moody and the Imperius curse. He had one very good reason to > teach Harry. Whom did we all not trust? Who was it hinted had put Harry's > name in the Goblet? Who at Hogwarts was presumed to have used the Imperius in > the past? > Karkaroff.... who was obviously furious that Harry was in the tournament, who > could be expected to favour his own champion, who had brought ?11 more > students whom it is quite possible, given his own reputation, he had already > taught to perform the Imperius. Crouch could reasonably expect that he would > do anything to make his own champion win, including Imperio'ing Harry to > throw the tournament. Harry, from Crouch/Moody's POV needed to be able to > resist if he was to be sure of winning. > > Eloise From rdoliver30 at yahoo.com Sun Jan 1 21:44:15 2006 From: rdoliver30 at yahoo.com (lupinlore) Date: Sun, 01 Jan 2006 21:44:15 -0000 Subject: The Dursleys and Being Nice and Civil In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 145707 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "lealess" wrote: I appreciate > that Rowling presents the "not nice" aspects of life in her books, but > I wonder if she simply accepts injustice and cruelty more than wants > to change them. Arthur's Muggle protection laws, Dumbledore's > detachment, Remus' reason, Molly's scolding: all of these seem to be > ineffectual. We are left with something called "love" which appears > to me to be sacrificing oneself more than acting with generosity > towards others in everyday life. > Actually, I think the main key to JKR's stance on these matters is her emphasis on the individual and the actions and beliefs of the individual. I do think we have a basic philosophical outlook at work, here. JKR just doesn't seem to like organizations or authority very much. I don't mean she's a fool or an anarchist. But I do think she sees authority and organizations (especially large organizations) as necessary evils rather than positive goods. It doesn't help that these basic tendencies become magnified by the structure of a story that is, after all, about adventures and heros, and thus MUST focus on individuals and shun collectives (and it is well to remember that authority in any reasonably developed society, even a magical one, is fundamentally a collective phenomenon). Thus, as you point out, organizations in her story are not to be trusted. The Ministry, the Daily Prophet, and the Wizengamot are corrupt. Hogwarts is primarily benign but fundamentally weak -- i.e. unable to realize its own best instincts and helpless even to protect itself at crucial junctures. And as you say, authority doesn't come off well, either. We really have few true examples of authority wielded in a benign and healthy way. Oh, there are benign characters who have authority, but as you point out they are rather ineffectual. Dumbledore is withdrawn and seemingly unable to realize his own avowed philosophy at a school that is theoretically under his control. Lupin is noble, but at critical moments subborned by his own weakness and self-doubt. Arthur, for all his dithering ways, manages to be in some ways the healthiest authority figure. He at least has managed to create a reasonably well-functioning family, but he is powerless within the political context of the Ministry and even his family is troubled by a challenge to his authority in the form of Percy. Meanwhile figures who frankly exert authority are cruel, evil, stupid, or all of the above. JKR has said some of this is deliberate, as she wants to keep the focus on Harry and how noble and heroic he is. Harry just wouldn't have as much of a chance to be a hero if, for instance, the Ministry were benign and well-functioning. She has even slipped and admitted, obliquely, to preaching in that she wants her young readers to realize how noble and heroic it can be to stand up for the right in a corrupt world. However, I do think that deliberate narrative strategy is underlain by fundamental philosophy -- i.e. I think JKR believes her young readers generally ARE faced with corrupt or at least incompetent organizations and by authority that is frequently selfish, ineffectual, and sometimes abusive, and which at the least must always be regarded with profound suspicion. In all of this I think JKR is really a certain kind of conservative. That is, she is the old-fashioned kind of conservative who thinks the way to deal with the world's problems is through the actions of virtuous individuals, and who is profoundly suspicious of any authority beyond that of a loving parent and any organization larger than the family, the village, and the local church congregation -- and thinks even those have a tendency to grow selfish and corrupt. If you want to put it in religious terms, she is the kind of conservative who thinks that original sin and its crippling effects are obvious and omnipresent and become magnified as levels of authority and sizes of organization increase. Where this comes back to your main point is in the question of justice. Given such a view of the world (talking now about her fictional universe) the only kind of justice possible is comeuppance or, if you prefer, vengeance, because that is the only kind of justice an individual, acting more or less outside of the corrupting and questionable constraints of larger organizations, can exact. Indeed, in such a world the individual is, in a sense, the only locus for true justice, because larger organizations and formal authorities, although necessary, are so tainted that any justice they attempt to provide would inevitably be twisted and off the mark, if not downright ineffectual. Lupinlore From kchuplis at alltel.net Sun Jan 1 19:56:12 2006 From: kchuplis at alltel.net (kchuplis) Date: Sun, 01 Jan 2006 19:56:12 -0000 Subject: What demolished the Potter's house at GH? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 145708 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "hambtty" wrote: Afterall we saw > the AK bounce around the Ministry of Magic and in the graveyard > without mass destruction, why then would it destroy a house? > But we saw a lot of other spells that bounced all over the ministry and Hogwarts that DID cause a lot of destruction. Missed AK spells seem to blow things up. I think there was just one helluva fight at the Potters with James and LV doing a ton of damage. kchuplis From coverton at netscape.com Sun Jan 1 14:10:46 2006 From: coverton at netscape.com (Corey Overton) Date: Sun, 1 Jan 2006 08:10:46 -0600 Subject: Punishments for the Dursleys In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <000501c60edd$2c4616f0$df4f81ac@Overton> No: HPFGUIDX 145709 > > Sue here: > > The Dursleys might actually get on with Umbridge, especially after she tells them how she > treated Harry. Dudley would be just the sort of boy she'd like, along the lines of the > Slytherin "Inquisitorial squad". > Corey here: I disagree with Sue'spost about Umbridge and the Dursleys. We can all agree that the Dursleys weren't very nice but even I don't think the Dursleys would have condoned that kind of treatment. As for them yelling at Black's mom that would be interesting. Wonder who would loose their voice first: The Dursleys or Black's mom. As for the cleaning of the house, I think Petunia would find a challenge to clean. I'd think she would want to show the WW that she can make it all nice and shiney. Your fellow list member, Corey From lealess at yahoo.com Mon Jan 2 00:44:55 2006 From: lealess at yahoo.com (lealess) Date: Mon, 02 Jan 2006 00:44:55 -0000 Subject: The Dursleys and Being Nice and Civil In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 145710 > lupinlore wrote: > > Actually, I think the main key to JKR's stance on these matters is > her emphasis on the individual and the actions and beliefs of the > individual. I do think we have a basic philosophical outlook at > work, here. JKR just doesn't seem to like organizations or authority > very much. I don't mean she's a fool or an anarchist. But I do > think she sees authority and organizations (especially large > organizations) as necessary evils rather than positive goods. It > doesn't help that these basic tendencies become magnified by the > structure of a story that is, after all, about adventures and heros, > and thus MUST focus on individuals and shun collectives (and it is > well to remember that authority in any reasonably developed society, > even a magical one, is fundamentally a collective phenomenon). > > > > In all of this I think JKR is really a certain kind of conservative. > That is, she is the old-fashioned kind of conservative who thinks > the way to deal with the world's problems is through the actions of > virtuous individuals, and who is profoundly suspicious of any > authority beyond that of a loving parent and any organization larger > than the family, the village, and the local church congregation -- > and thinks even those have a tendency to grow selfish and corrupt. lealess: Some friends and I were talking about what can be called a resistance movement and how various such movements have been lauded or condemned throughout history (I don't know about you, but this was how I spent my New Year's Eve, that and watching Grizzly Man -- the story of a self-styled hero). Thinking about this in light of your comments, all of which I agree with, I realized that humans can act heroically alone, and maybe this is what JKR is aiming for, but humans will be more successful if they work in cooperation with others. This is yet another view of social organization, and it has some support, though not strong, in the Potterverse, specifically with the Trio and to a lesser extent with the Order. Dumbledore recognized he needed a resistance movement against the ambitions of the Death Eaters, the stupidity of the Ministry, and even the passivity of the general populace. No matter how heroic he personally was willing to be, forming the Order was a far more effective strategy than acting alone. Of course, he seems to have enjoyed absolute authority over the Order and now that he's gone, the Order may be rudderless and ineffective. Similarly, I don't think anyone believes that Harry will prevail against Voldemort on his own. Though the final confrontation may be more-or-less one-on-one, Harry will be standing on the shoulders of many people to reach that point. Without the cooperation of Ron and Hermione, Harry the hero might not be able to complete the tasks set out for him. Still, I expect he will be the "leader" of the Trio in the 7th book, much as Dumbledore led the Order. Lupinlore: > If you want to put it in religious terms, she is the kind of > conservative who thinks that original sin and its crippling effects > are obvious and omnipresent and become magnified as levels of > authority and sizes of organization increase. lealess: This is akin to the reason I believe her world is Hobbesian, as I understand the word. The wizarding world is basically brutish and nasty. Perhaps the perception of people as being tainted by original sin determines this. People have limited choices within this world, and they almost always act to further their own selfish interest. Only authority can keep the society in order and everyone off each others' throats, but authority takes natural rights away from people. I agree that JKR is a certain kind of conservative, but I think this extends beyond individualism to encompass the irresistible and, to her mind, justified authority of a few, like Dumbledore or Harry, against the illegitimate authority of others who do not keep the social contract, like Voldemort. Lupinlore: > Where this comes back to your main point is in the question of > justice. Given such a view of the world (talking now about her > fictional universe) the only kind of justice possible is comeuppance > or, if you prefer, vengeance, because that is the only kind of > justice an individual, acting more or less outside of the corrupting > and questionable constraints of larger organizations, can exact. > Indeed, in such a world the individual is, in a sense, the only > locus for true justice, because larger organizations and formal > authorities, although necessary, are so tainted that any justice > they attempt to provide would inevitably be twisted and off the > mark, if not downright ineffectual. lealess: Interesting, and it's hard to think of a way to discuss this and bring it on topic. If this is the message of the books, it is worrisome to me, but perhaps not to individuals like Sirhan Sirhan, for example. And for every Sirius Black in Azkaban, there were several Death Eaters who did belong there and weren't hoping to get out soon -- but one Sirius Black reveals as unjust the whole mechanism of how they got there, regardless of who they were. lealess From rdoliver30 at yahoo.com Sun Jan 1 20:57:55 2006 From: rdoliver30 at yahoo.com (lupinlore) Date: Sun, 01 Jan 2006 20:57:55 -0000 Subject: Real child abuse/ Snape again In-Reply-To: <20060101144803.85258.qmail@web53112.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 145711 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Magda Grantwich wrote: > > Since it seems that the child abuse issue is never going to go away > (despite my fervent Christmas wish), it almost seems like it should > be set up as a separate list so devotees can go at it with full force > (my latest desperate New Years wish). > Well, you are certainly right that it isn't going to go away. It is far too important an issue for that. As to a separate list, why on Earth would we need that? This is about the HP books, and the child abuse issue certainly does arise out of and pertain to canon. Perhaps you mean that we should confine our canon discussion to issues that JKR definitely means to put forth AS issues? I suppose in that vain we would keep on talking about Snape and whether he is ESE (I personally don't think so), OFH (a good way of dealing with him, from a storyline standpoint), DDM (which I think is very possible, although I also think it would be poor writing and, frankly, so silly, unbelievable, and downright laughable that I would probably give myself a hernia from guffawing in derision), Grey (better than OFH and leagues better in terms of writing than DDM) or LID (which is the most logical and believable of all the possibilities). However, what JKR wants is not at all what JKR gets, and what she puts forth as issues may, perhaps, not be the most important issues in her stories. It is rather an old fashioned thing to say, but stories are like living things, they grow in directions their parents don't anticipate, and often take on meanings that their creators did not consciously infuse into them. I remember a friend of mine, a Tolkien expert by way of a degree in medieval literature (she became a Tolkien expert when she discovered nobody cared about her theories concerning Sir Gawain and the Green Knight as medieval myth, but everybody was fascinated by the story as a bit of Tolkienia), talking about whether the War of the Ring resonated with WW II. Tolkien always claimed it did not. She said it did. As she put it, "The LoTR is about WW II because readers say it's about WW II. Just because Tolkien was the author doesn't give him any more say over what the story's about than anybody else." So, in a very real way, the HP stories are about child abuse because we say they are about child abuse. JKR, I am sure, did not mean for them to be about child abuse. But she doesn't have anymore right than anybody else to determine what the stories are about. Her rights consist of signing autographs and cashing royalty checks. In any case, no the issue isn't going to go away. And no, it isn't going to get it's own separate list. And my advice to anyone who doesn't like the subject is don't read the threads. The titles of the posts on this subject tend to be very clear, after all. Lupinlore From kchuplis at alltel.net Sun Jan 1 22:28:03 2006 From: kchuplis at alltel.net (kchuplis) Date: Sun, 01 Jan 2006 22:28:03 -0000 Subject: C!M Imperius/no more dueling In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 145712 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "potioncat" wrote: > Potioncat: > I happened to be back in 2002 and found this comment by Eloise in > post 336329 > > Crouch could reasonably expect that > he would > > do anything to make his own champion win, including Imperio'ing > Harry to > > throw the tournament. Harry, from Crouch/Moody's POV needed to be > able to > > resist if he was to be sure of winning. > > > > Eloise > I think that is good. We can also reasonably assume that no matter WHAT Crouch/ Moody taught them, he would never believe they would be a match for LV. That would not be even in his frame of reference as the most slavish, adoring DE besides Bella. Indeed, we know that it was the wands and the effect of brother wands not fighting that had the most to do with Harry's escape. Hmmm. So, that begs another point...we know LV won't "duel" again so the denouement is going to have to be done in some other way. kchuplis From crystal_of_ravenclaw at yahoo.com Sun Jan 1 23:52:43 2006 From: crystal_of_ravenclaw at yahoo.com (Crystal Williams) Date: Sun, 1 Jan 2006 15:52:43 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Clever DD and why I think it is Dudley In-Reply-To: <20060101190604.74805.qmail@web53305.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20060101235243.60021.qmail@web37010.mail.mud.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 145713 hambtty : JKR hinting that someone will become magical at a late age. I know most think that it will be Mrs. Figg but surely she would have discovered her magic, if any by now. I think it is Dudley. Luckdragon: Jo has already dispelled this idea. Is there more to Dudley than meets the eye? No. [Laughter]. What you see is what you get. I am happy to say that he is definitely a character without much back story. He is just Dudley. The next book, Half Blood Prince, is the least that you see of the Dursleys. You see them quite briefly. You see them a bit more in the final book, but you don?t get a lot of Dudley in book six?very few lines. I am sorry if there are Dudley fans out there, but I think you need to look at your priorities if it is Dudley that you are looking forward to. Crystal: I still think the whole Dudley thing discovering his magic is still true. Just because Dudley didn't have many lines doesn't mean he won't be the late age wizard. Look at Neville, he didn't start off with many lines and look at what story unfolded about him. Then there is Ms.Figg we didn't hear much about her except she was a horrible baby sitter for Harry and then in book 5 she ends up being in touch with Dumbledore and all this other stuff. So just because Dudley doesn't have many lines doesn't mean he won't be the late blooming wizard. I would love to see it be him since I think it would be quite comical. Thats just my opinion. From stevejjen at earthlink.net Mon Jan 2 02:35:16 2006 From: stevejjen at earthlink.net (Jen Reese) Date: Mon, 02 Jan 2006 02:35:16 -0000 Subject: Real child abuse/ Snape again In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 145714 > > Pippin: > > Oh, I disagree. We do see other teachers abuse their power. > > I think telling a student he is fated to die is an abuse of > > power. > Alla: > Yeah, sure. I will agree with that, and if Trelawney would have > done it every single lesson, I would even agree with you that it > is an emotional abuse. Jen: This point reminded me of Trelawney's and Harry's discussion in HBP: "I miss having you in my classes, Harry," she said, soulfully as they set off together. "You were never much of a Seer....but you were a wonderful Object...." Harry did not reply; he had loathed being the Object of Professor Trelawney's continual predictions of doom. (The Seer Overheard, p. 544, Scholastic) That bothered me, about Harry being the Object. I know that's just psychic talk, but the fact that Trelawney is basically 'fessing up to using Harry and then finding out how deeply Harry hated being in that position did make me think of a teacher abusing her power. I hadn't realized quite how much Harry hated it until JKR used the word 'loathed' which is usually reserved for Snape . I'm reading POA to my son and reading aloud to a child makes you notice things you might not when reading to yourself. I found Trelawney's antics laughable before, now I think her attempts to scare the students in order to appear legitimate is a pretty jerky thing to do. And about teachers in general and abuse of power, this list proves there are many opinions as to who is the worst offender. I found Umbridge chilling because she was an unknown with a very hidden agenda. Her use of censorship in the classroom was apalling, as well as the actual use of physical abuse for punishment. It was an amusing idea for Filch to cry for the thumbscrews and chains, but to actually see such cruelty in action made Snape pale in comparison for me. I think the fact he was a known and predictable quanitity for Harry after the first class is a mitigating factor in my mind: For 6 books Harry's been hearing the same needling, the same taunts, the same James complex, the same zeros, the same points taken--come on, get some new material Severus! With Umbridge, I never felt sure what she would do next, she just kept upping her level of domination and secrecy until that moment she was willing to Crucio Harry. Yikes! Jen D.: > What you two keep saying without saying is that Harry is > emotionally attached to "safe" Hogwarts, a Hogwarts run by > Dumbledore. Remember when Dumbledore was sent away in COS and how > the atmosphere changed so completely (never mind Snape's true > motives towards Harry)? And under Umbridge, Hogwarts again became > a very unsafe, non-nurturing place, never mind Binns or > Trelawney's behavior. Harry, it seems, could handle anything > anyone dished out as long as DD was presiding over the situation, > the ultimate authority albeit. And now that DD is no more, Harry > won't be going back. Hogwarts is just as unsafe (in much more > serious ways than Snape ever tried to be)as the rest of the WW. Jen R: This is such a good (and sad) point. Harry did trust Dumbledore completely. That's the point I come back to whenever debate starts about "Dumbledore should have done this or that or..." Harry thought Dumbledore's choices were right in almost every case, and even when he disagreed with him as he did in OOTP, the relationship wasn't torn apart. Having that kind of faith in someone does bring about a huge measure of security. Another!Jen, as we tend to travel in packs :). From elfundeb at gmail.com Mon Jan 2 02:53:37 2006 From: elfundeb at gmail.com (elfundeb) Date: Sun, 1 Jan 2006 21:53:37 -0500 Subject: Memory Charms Message-ID: <80f25c3a0601011853i5ed4d757ga1a05b9b7f473caf@mail.gmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 145715 Catlady (Rita Prince Winston) wrote: Simon wrote in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/145596 : << Tom Riddle breaks a memory charm in between PoA and GoF, Bertha I think her name is. So I believe that Lockhart will get his memory back. >> The means that Voldie used to break the Memory Charm on Bertha "were powerful, and when [he] had extracted all useful information from her, her mind and body were both damaged beyond repair." Some listies think that means that Memory Charms are broken by torture in general or Cruciatis Curse in particular, but I think it means that there are spells or potions for breaking Memory Charms, but they have side effects that would result in Lockhart NOT being released from St Mungo's. Debbie: The notion that Voldemort used torture to break Bertha's Memory Charm has specific canon support. In GoF ch. 35 Crouch Jr. (under Veritaserum) states, "My master had found out that I was still alive. He had captured Bertha Jorkins in Albania. He had tortured her. She told him a great deal. . . . He tortured her until he broke through the Memory Charm my father had placed on her. She told him I had escaped from Azkaban." Canon doesn't tell us is whether the torture consists of the Cruciatus Curse or whether there is a specialized curse for breaking through Memory Charms that acts on the brain. I suppose I should be a proponent of the Cruciatus Curse, as that fits best with my age-old speculation that Frank and Alice Longbottom were tortured to break through a Memory Charm, but I don't think it matters. Of course, St. Mungo's can't use torture to cure a memory charm, because their function is to heal and not to damage the patient's body and mind beyond repair. ;-] In fact, the memory damage can't be cured at all; the St. Mungo's healer points out that the closed ward is for *permanent* spell damage. Even with "intensive remedial potions and charms and a bit of luck" they can only produce "some improvement." (By the way, Fantastic Beasts indicates that memory potions are made from the feathers of the Jobberknoll.) So, I doubt we'll see Lockhart -- or the Longbottoms -- in Book 7. Debbie wishing everyone a happy new year [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From jferer at yahoo.com Mon Jan 2 04:03:06 2006 From: jferer at yahoo.com (Jim Ferer) Date: Mon, 02 Jan 2006 04:03:06 -0000 Subject: What demolished the Potter's house at GH? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 145716 Kchuplis:" But we saw a lot of other spells that bounced all over the ministry and Hogwarts that DID cause a lot of destruction. Missed AK spells seem to blow things up. I think there was just one helluva fight at the Potters with James and LV doing a ton of damage." We've seen lots of spells have a physical effect. We've seen Stunners chip stone off gravestones, we've seen people knocked around. There seems to be two factors in whether this happens or not: ? If a spell goes wrong or misses, it's likely to break something. Think of the stunners that missed Harry in the graveyard or Godric's Hollow. ? The vehemence or power of the caster. Think of Snape blasting Lockhart or Harry and Ron blasting Lockhart. (or of Snape's AK on Dumbledore) If you're being intense (or po'd) when you cast a spell, something's gonna happen. Your examples from the MoM battle are perfect examples. Spells have physical force, especially if they miss (think of an exploding power line.) Jim Ferer From stevejjen at earthlink.net Mon Jan 2 05:01:04 2006 From: stevejjen at earthlink.net (Jen Reese) Date: Mon, 02 Jan 2006 05:01:04 -0000 Subject: "Stand aside, girl" and the End Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 145717 My thoughts keep drifting to Godric's Hollow and I'm wondering again why Voldemort gave Lily the chance to stand aside. Now that JKR has given us a better picture of the way Voldemort thinks and his particular obsessions and patterns, the idea that Voldemort would save Lily because Snape (or anyone) asked him to doesn't fit for me. He appears to be more likely to hold a person's weaknesses, especially feelings of love, against the person rather than to reward them. Like Wormtail asking that Harry be spared in GOF, or using Draco for an impossible task even though Narcissa despaired for him. He's not about granting favors. The second most common suggestion is that Voldemort thought Lily too silly to bother with since his laser focus was on killing James and Harry. This one, too, falls flat for me. Lily had thrice defied him by the time Harry was born and was an Order member. She posed a threat to him in the grand scheme of things, if not in that particular moment. Why bother picking off Order members one by one only to let one of the more powerful ones have a free pass? This idea doesn't fit with the 'kill the spare' mentality of Voldemort. To me it seems rather than Lily being silly and unimportant she was instead worrisome to Voldemort for some reason and he didn't *want* to kill her, so much so he offered her several chances to move out of the way. Very uncharacteristic. Now the way I see it, there are two unanswered questions which could provide an explanation for why Voldemort acted so unusually: 1) How did James and Lily thrice defy him? 2) What was Lily's work before she died? Given that the first question is in the prophecy, I was thinking that must be the most important one to answer. But then there's this quote by JKR: "Now the important thing about Harry's mother, the really, really significant thing, you're going to find out in 2 parts. You'll find out a lot more about her in Book 5, or you'll find out something very significant about her in Book 5, then you'll find out something incredibly important about her in Book 7. But I can't tell you what those things are so I'm sorry, but yes, you will find out more about her because both of them are very important in what Harry ends up having to do." (The Connection, 1999) So it sounds like a revelation about Lily alone will actually have the most meaning for the last book instead of Lily as one of the parents who 'thrice defied him'. I think the ways in which the Potters and Longbottoms defied Voldemort will prove to be important backstory and perhaps Neville and Harry will even learn about what happened together, but the reason Lily was given a choice to step aside will most likely have to do question #2, her mysterious work. JKR said there were places Harry needed to go in Book 5 in order to 'play fair for the reader in the resolution of Book 7'. So the Department of Mysteries will be important again. I'm not the first to suggest Lily worked there, it's just that now the idea she might have worked in the Veil room and studied death takes on a new meaning given the information about Voldemort in HBP. His greatest fear is death, and Dumbledore is the only person he feared probably in part because he was unafraid to die, so it's fitting Voldemort might find Lily worrisome if she actually studied death rather than feared it. I also think the locked room is a possibility too, perhaps Lily studied both, but since Voldemort fears death and underestimates love it seems more likely Lily working in the Veil room would give him pause. If this is true, then I think it's a clue to not only why Voldemort asked Lily to step aside, but what will happen in book 7. Lily would then be an example of someone possessing great love and no fear of death. Even though Harry possesses great quantities of love, he underestimates its power just as Voldemort does. Since Harry found the courage of James inside himself in POA, he will likely come to terms with Lily's love and discover that power inside himself as well. And hoo boy, will he need it! Voldemort will definitely be using Harry's hatred of Snape to tempt him in Book 7 in my opinion, and Dumbledore tried mightily to tell him his love will be his only protection against the lure of Voldemort's power. Luckily we can count on Harry figuring this out in time to save himself from the temptation to kill Snape and get on with the business of Voldemort. And for anyone who likes the game of Clue: Harry defeating Voldemort in the locked room with the gong spell. Jen From PenapartElf at aol.com Mon Jan 2 05:53:22 2006 From: PenapartElf at aol.com (PenapartElf at aol.com) Date: Mon, 2 Jan 2006 00:53:22 EST Subject: ADMIN: New Year's Resolutions for HPfGU Message-ID: <157.5e82a4bd.30ea19d2@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 145718 To our new members - Welcome! To our old hands - Welcome back for another year! There are times when it's appropriate to shift your gears; posting at HPfGU is one of them. Remember: posting conventions here are different than that of many other websites. Please join the other members of the HPfGU community in making these New Year's Resolutions: I solemnly swear that I will ~ check the email accounts associated with my HPfGU memberships even when I am on "webview only" (see *) ~ be courteous: challenge ideas without insulting people ~ use the right list and be on topic; when posting to the main list, I will support my points about canon using canon ~ use standard spelling, grammar and punctuation; will proofread and spell check ~ attribute accurately ~ sign my posts so *others* can attribute accurately ~ snip responsibly by deleting everything that does not contribute to making my point ~ update subject headings and make them accurate; add prefix if called for ~ put my comments after quoted materials ~ read a thread in its entirety before responding, yield not to the temptation to repeat anything unnecessarily, and check webview one last time before hitting "send" ~ send introductory or off-topic posts to OTChatter at http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPFGU-OTChatter ~ send posts involving the HP movies to Movie at http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPFGU-Movie (see **) ~ send one-liners and 'me too!' posts to the individual(s) concerned off-list ~ combine short posts, especially if in the same thread, and remember to update the subject heading if necessary ~ refrain from dominating the list at any given time by posting more than my fair share (see ***) ~ check http://www.HP-Lexicon.org , ask my List Elf, or search the FAQs ( located at http://tinyurl.com/5rbds aka http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/files/Admin_Files/HPfGU_FAQ.html ) if I've factual questions ~ check OTChatter if I've questions about JKR's site that don't concern canon ~ provide links to as opposed to reprinting copyrighted materials such as articles, books, posts made in other forums, etc. unless I've gotten permission from the copyright holder to reprint The guilty shall remain unnamed here but please note that the above check list should be used not just by the newcomers but also by the old hands whose posts are no longer being moderated. Be advised: Owlers and Howlers are standing by. As always, "The Humongous Bigfile, Posting Rules You Never Knew You Had to Follow and How to Conform to Them Now That You've Signed Up" is available for reference at http://tinyurl.com/a2z32 (which is aka http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/files/Admin_Files/HBF_Text__MUST_R EAD ) and explains the various points above in greater details. To 2006! :) Penapart Elf for the HPfGU List Admin Team * If the elves do not receive replies to emails we send to list members, we will assume the messages aren't being seen and reserve the right to return listees to moderated status or to revoke posting privileges when necessary. Should you find yourself in either situation, please answer this last ditch attempt to get your attention. Thanks! ** Coming very soon to Movie...Chances to contend for prizes: free GoF soundtrack CDs! *** For the numerically inclined, please know that more than 3 appearances onlist for any given 24 hours period could be considered discourteous. REMINDER: replies to this admin onlist are off-topic but responses or questions sent to HPforGrownups-Owner @yahoogroups.com (minus that extra space) would be most welcomed. You are also welcome to join http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPFGU-Feedback if you feel that discussion is called for. Be sure to read the home page there for instructions on joining. From juli17 at aol.com Mon Jan 2 07:29:21 2006 From: juli17 at aol.com (juli17ptf) Date: Mon, 02 Jan 2006 07:29:21 -0000 Subject: Real child abuse/ Snape again In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 145719 Lupinlore: > Perhaps you mean that we should confine our canon discussion to issues > that JKR definitely means to put forth AS issues? I suppose in that > vain we would keep on talking about Snape and whether he is ESE (I > personally don't think so), OFH (a good way of dealing with him, from > a storyline standpoint), DDM (which I think is very possible, although > I also think it would be poor writing and, frankly, so silly, > unbelievable, and downright laughable that I would probably give > myself a hernia from guffawing in derision), Grey (better than OFH and > leagues better in terms of writing than DDM) or LID (which is the most > logical and believable of all the possibilities). Julie: Of course, these labels are not all mutually exclusive, except perhaps DDM and ESE. DDM can flow into Grey, which can flow into LID, etc, etc. The most believable Snape will have shades of several qualities, just as real humans do. (Which is why DDM!Snape to me is most definitely not analogous to Good!Snape or Hero!Snape, though some insist on pressing that narrow definition.) Lupinlore: > However, what JKR wants is not at all what JKR gets, and what she puts > forth as issues may, perhaps, not be the most important issues in her > stories. It is rather an old fashioned thing to say, but stories are > like living things, they grow in directions their parents don't > anticipate, and often take on meanings that their creators did not > consciously infuse into them. Julie: I'm not sure JKR expects to "get what she wants," as she is intelligent enough to know that some readers will and some won't like various plot developments (and has said so). And while creators may infuse their stories with meanings, the real meanings stories take on to the reader are those infused *by* the reader him/herself. We all interpret the world and everything in it from our own individual perspective, which may be similar to the creator's perspective, or may not. Lupinlore: > I remember a friend of mine, a Tolkien expert by way of a degree in > medieval literature (she became a Tolkien expert when she discovered > nobody cared about her theories concerning Sir Gawain and the Green > Knight as medieval myth, but everybody was fascinated by the story as > a bit of Tolkienia), talking about whether the War of the Ring > resonated with WW II. Tolkien always claimed it did not. She said it > did. As she put it, "The LoTR is about WW II because readers say it's > about WW II. Just because Tolkien was the author doesn't give him any > more say over what the story's about than anybody else." Julie: She's right that LotR is about WWII to readers who interpret it that way. But I'd says Tolkien is just as correct in saying he didn't *write* it about WWII (which is presumably what he meant). Lupinlore: > > So, in a very real way, the HP stories are about child abuse because > we say they are about child abuse. JKR, I am sure, did not mean for > them to be about child abuse. But she doesn't have anymore right than > anybody else to determine what the stories are about. Her rights > consist of signing autographs and cashing royalty checks. Julie: Again, she cannot tell a reader what a book is about, as that interpretation belongs to each individual reader. But she has the right to say she was making no personal statement about child abuse in the books (i.e. she can't say what the books are about, but she can say what she *wrote* the books about). Which does give her a bit more say about her own stories than simply signing autographs and cashing royalty checks. Oh, and she gets to keep the copyright ;-) Julie From bboyminn at yahoo.com Mon Jan 2 07:46:12 2006 From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Mon, 02 Jan 2006 07:46:12 -0000 Subject: DD descendents -Generation Nitpick In-Reply-To: <000c01c60f0e$aec458e0$704b6d51@f3b7j4> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 145720 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "manawydan" wrote: > > Catlady wrote: > > ... > > (Lily and I were born in 1950-something. My mother was born > > in 1920-something. Her mother, my grandma, was born in > > 1890-something. Her mother, my great-grandmother, died > > before I was born, and the pattern suggests she was born > > in 1860-something. Dumble, being 150 years old in the 1990s, > > was born in the 1840s and therefore old enough to be a daddy > > in the 1860s.) > > Ffred: > > Generations in the RW are, as you rightly say, about 30 years. > But, given the longer wizarding life span ...edited... That > would suggest to me that a generation is around 90 years in the > WW to allow for the longer lifespans obviously, given shorter > Muggle lives, a mixed marriage would have children earlier and > there would be, as in our own world, a spread of parental ages > around the average .... > > hwyl > > Ffred bboyminn: Nice concept Ffred, but I think there is a flaw in your logic. I guess it depends on how you define a 'generation'. To some extent it is the time between when parents have kids and when those kids grow up enough to have kids of their own. In a sense, it is a theoretical timespan rather that an actual, and it is generally about 20 years or so. So regardless of the fact that wizards live longer, the span of each theoretical generation would be the same; about 20 years. The differences is that wizards could spawn more than one generation. Wizards could marry at 20 and have 3 kids in 5 years, and wait for those kids to grow to be age 20 and have kids of their own. Then the original wizard parents could take a break of 20 years and still be young enough to start having kids again, thereby spawing a second new generation. You are right however, in general a muggle woman who married a wizard, would most likely only be fertile long enough to spawn roughly one new generation. I guess I'm just nitpicking at a fine point here, and that point is based on how a 'generation' is defined. Steve/bboyminn From elfundeb at gmail.com Mon Jan 2 13:40:05 2006 From: elfundeb at gmail.com (elfundeb) Date: Mon, 2 Jan 2006 08:40:05 -0500 Subject: Love and Vengeance (WAS: The Dursleys and Being Nice and Civil) Message-ID: <80f25c3a0601020540w5577ed14i54b32c21fb8b376@mail.gmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 145721 I've been mulling over notions of vengeance, justice and love in HP for some time, and since the subject of vengeance has come up, this is a good opportunity to try to sort out some of the apparently contradictory messages that seem to appear in the books. These reflections spring to some degree from a Christmas Eve homily in which the former pope was quoted as having said something to the effect that evil can be defeated, but it will be supplanted by a new and different evil if conventional weapons are used to defeat it. The only weapon that can vanquish evil forever is love. (The pope apparently was referencing the rise of Communism after WWII.) I cannot find the quote, but will use the concept as a springboard anyway. This is long, but some of it consists of quotes from the books . . . . Taking Lupinlore's second point first (which I agree with) because it helps set up the discussion of the second point: Indeed, in such a world the individual is, in a sense, the only locus for true justice, because larger organizations and formal authorities, although necessary, are so tainted that any justice they attempt to provide would inevitably be twisted and off the mark, if not downright ineffectual. HP opens during an interregnum in the struggle to defeat Voldemort. The interregnum has occurred because Harry, marked by love and sacrifice, deflected Voldemort's curse. VWI was fought primarily with Voldemort's own weapons. From GoF ch. 27: "[Crouch] rose quickly in the Ministry. The Aurors were given new powers -- powers to kill rather than capture, for instance. . . . Crouch fought violence with violence, and authorized the use of the Unforgivable Curses on suspects." Some of the DEs were killed by Aurors -- Rosier and Wilkes, for instance. But the Aurors did not appear to have any success against Voldemort himself. The developments of OOP and HBP make clear that the Ministry and the Aurors -- even if they no longer use Unforgivable Curses to fight Voldemort, cannot defeat him permanently because their weapons are those of conventional political and military warfare rather than those of love. Harry cannot defeat Voldemort operating through the Ministry because its weapons do not include love. Only the Order of the Phoenix, which operates outside the official Ministry crime-fighting organization, that uses the unconventional weapons that actually could defeat Voldemort. Interestingly, in the battles fought by the Order against the DEs, the Order members appear to fight defensively. Certainly none of them attempts to cast an Unforgivable Curse. (In HBP, the dead DE was killed by friendly fire.) Now back to Lupinlore's first point: Where this comes back to your main point is in the question of justice. Given such a view of the world (talking now about her fictional universe) the only kind of justice possible is comeuppance or, if you prefer, vengeance, because that is the only kind of justice an individual, acting more or less outside of the corrupting and questionable constraints of larger organizations, can exact. Indeed, in such a world the individual is, in a sense, the only locus for true justice, because larger organizations and formal authorities, although necessary, are so tainted that any justice they attempt to provide would inevitably be twisted and off the mark, if not downright ineffectual. Debbie: Revenge is a form of justice. It's a method that Harry's godfather, Sirius, obsessed with killing Pettigrew, certainly endorsed. It's also a method that has been employed already by the government. However, the Prophecy tells us that "[t]he One with the power to vanquish the Dark Lord . . . will have power the Dark Lord knows not . . ." (OOP ch. 37) The implication, well discussed here, is that power will be the difference between success and failure. In HBP ch 23, Dumbledore confirms that the power that Harry has that Voldemort knows not is the power to love. Dumbledore's exposition of the meaning of this power is intermingled with notions of vengeance, seemingly in support of Lupinlore's proposition that the only justice in HP is vengeance. He states: "Voldemort singled you out as the person who would be most dangerous to him -- and in doing so, he *made* you the person who would be most dangerous to him. . . . If Voldemort had never murdered your father, would he have imparted in you a furious desire for revenge? Of course not!" Dumbledore goes on to state that "'you have never been seduced by the Dark Arts, never, even for a second, shown the slightest desire to become one of Voldemort's followers!' 'Of course I haven't!' said Harry indignantly. 'He killed my mum and dad!' 'You are protected, in short, by your ability to love!' said Dumbledore loudly. 'The only protection that can possibly work against the lure of power like Voldemort's! In spite of all the temptation you have endured, all the suffering, you remain pure in heart, just as pure as you were at the age of eleven, when you stared into a mirror that reflected your heart's desire, and it showed you only the way to thwart Lord Voldemort.'" And later in the same chapter -- "[Harry] thought of his mother, his father and Sirius. He thought of Cedric Diggory. He thought of all the terrible deeds he knew Lord Voldemort had done. A flame seemed to leap inside his chest, searing his throat. 'I'd want him finished,' said Harry quietly. 'And I'd want to do it.'" So, Harry *thinks* his mission is to kill Voldemort to avenge the deaths of James and Lily, Sirius, Cedric and countless others. However, that seems more akin to the conventional weapons employed by the Ministry than to love. To me, equating love with vengeance is a contradiction in terms. Forgive me for quoting the Bible, but I cannot help think of the following passage (edited for brevity) when I read what JKR has written about the power of love: "'You have learned how it was said: Eye for eye and tooth for tooth. But I say to you: offer the wicked man no resistance. . . . You have learned how it was said: You must love your neighbor and hate your enemy. But I say this to you: love your enemies . . . For if you love those you love you, what right have you to claim any credit? Even the tax collectors do as much, do they not?'" (Matthew 5:38-48.) A mother's love for her child can be very powerful, and in fact Lily's love for Harry forms the basis of Harry's protection from Voldemort, as Dumbledore points out again and again. ("Your mother died to save you. If there is one thing that Voldemort cannot understand, it is love. He didn't realize that love as powerful as your mother's for you leaves its own mark." PS/SS ch. 17). The problem is that I'm sure Narcissa loves Draco as much as Lily loved Harry. That she arranged to protect Draco through an Unbreakable Vow instead of offering to sacrifice herself instead doesn't mean she loved Draco less than Lily loved Harry; it means that she arranged for someone else to do the sacrificing. So when Dumbledore goes on to emphasize Lily's sacrifice ("If he had not forced your mother to die for you, would he have given you a magical protection he could not penetrate?"), it is the act of sacrifice as an expression of love, not the love itself, that strikes me as extraordinary. For love itself to be extraordinary, it must extend beyond those friends and family that are the usual and expected objects of that love. And it must reject vengeance. Furthermore, is vengeance really consistent with Harry's purity of heart? Harry's purity of heart has now saved him from Voldemort at least three times. First, in PS/SS, it allowed him to retrieve the Stone. In CoS it brought Fawkes and Gryffindor's sword to him. And in GoF phoenix song gave him courage because of his purity of heart. It plays a role elsewhere as well. In both OOP and HBP he has tried to cast Unforgivable Curses, but failed in both attempts. Snape tells him during his escape from Hogwarts that Harry lacks the nerve or the ability. I think that's true, but the reason why is is purity of heart. The phoenix connection is very important to assessing the likelihood that Harry could ever kill Voldemort. According to Fantastic Beasts, the phoenix "has never been known to kill." Thus, I associate Harry's purity of heart with the renunciation of vengeance. Another clue that Harry will not avenge his parents' and Sirius' deaths appears at the very end of HBP, Despite his apparent resolve, Harry is far from eager to take on his task. "'Then I've got to track down the rest of the Horcruxes, haven't I?' said Harry, his eyes upon Dumbledore's white tomb, reflected in the water on the other side of the lake. 'That's what he wanted me to do . . . . I've got to find them and destroy them and then I've got to go after the seventh bit of Voldemort's soul, the bit that's still in his body, and I'm the one who's going to kill him. And if I meet Severus Snape along the way,' he added, 'so much the better for me, so much the worse for him.'" He's preparing hinself to kill Voldemort because he thinks it's what Dumbledore wanted him to do. But it's almost as though his resolve is hardened by the thought of meeting Snape along the way and avenging Dumbledore's death. But we know that's not going to happen. The inclusion of Snape in his thinking here seems a sure sign that he does not yet understand the nature of his mission. Moreover, Harry has already questioned the notion of vengeance as justice on the basis that it stains the avengers. >From the Shrieking Shack (PoA ch. 17). "Harry raised the wand. Now was the moment to do it. Now was the moment to avenge his mother and father. He was going to kill Black. He had to kill Black. This was his chance . . . The seconds lengthened. And still Harry stood frozen there, wand poised, Black staring up at him, Crookshanks on his chest." I see this passage as a defining moment for Harry, an implicit realization that vengeance is not a sufficient motivator for killing, though he doesn't appreciate it yet ("Harry stood there, feeling suddenly empty. He hadn't done it. His nerve had failed him. Black was going to be handed back to the dementors."). Harry has shown flashes of the higher justice that mercy represents. Later on in the Shrieking Shack (PoA ch. 19), he prevents Sirius and Remus from doing the same thing: "'NO!' Harry yelled. He ran forward, placing himself in front of Pettigrew, facing the wands. 'You can't kill him,' he said breathlessly." He tells Pettigrew, "'I'm not doing this for you. I'm doing it because -- I don't reckon my dad would've wanted them to become killers -- just for you.'" Surely if killing tears the soul, Harry cannot kill Voldemort without sacrificing his own purity of heart. I've written in the past that I am attracted to Horcrux!Harry theories because it would allow him to defeat Voldemort through his own self-sacrifice rather than by killing him outright. While I still like that idea (and believe that Harry will demonstrate a willingness to sacrifice himself, I don't believe that the denouemont of the series will be Harry's death (by sacrifice or otherwise, and whether or not he is a horcrux). Instead, I think Harry will discover that the key to vanquishing Voldemort is love, exemplified by mercy. Voldemort will understand that he is wholly dependent on Harry's mercy. And Harry, being pure in heart, will grant it. So why does Dumbledore insist that Harry has 'got to' try to kill Voldemort? (HBP ch. 23). Way back in PS/SS, Dumbledore characterized Voldemort by his lack of mercy. PS/SS ch. 17: "He left Quirrell to die; he shows just as little mercy to his followers as his enemies." In contrast, the Good side is expected to show mercy. POA ch. 19: "'Harry,' whispered Pettigrew, shuffling toward him, hands outstretched. 'Harry, James wouldn't have wanted me killed . . . James would have understood, Harry . . . he would have shown me mercy . . .'" Is Dumbledore himself setting too much store by the Prophecy, because it states that "either must die at the hand of the other" ? But Dumbledore tells Harry that the Hall of Prophecies at the DoM is full of prophecies that have not come true, and further that *this* prophecy would not be fulfilled but for the fact that Voldemort acts in reliance upon it. Perhaps Dumbledore is simply acknowledging that the desire for revenge is a natural human response to grief. Perhaps he has not yet discerned how Harry can use the power of love as a weapon as well as a shield. Perhaps Dumbledore knows that it can be channelled into a higher form of justice, but realizes that Harry must discern for himself how to do that. In fact, the mercy Dumbledore is willing to grant to Draco on the Astronomy Tower seems much closer to the "Love thine enemies" quote than it does to his approval of Harry's "furious desire for revenge." HBP ch. 27: "Malfoy stared at Dumbledore. 'But I got this far, didn't I?' he said slowly. 'They thought I'd die in the attempt, but I'm here . . . and you're in my power . . . I'm the one with the wand . . . you're at my mercy . . .' 'No, Draco,' said Dumbledore quietly. 'It is my mercy, and not yours, that matters now.' Malfoy did not speak. His mouth was open, his wand hand still trembling. Harry thought he saw it drop by a fraction." He doesn't just forgive Draco; he offers him a shot at redemption. Maybe Dumbledore's actions on the Tower foreshadow the final confrontation. I see that Jen Reese summed up this concept very nicely last night: Even though Harry possesses great quantities of love, he > underestimates its power just as Voldemort does. Since Harry found the > courage of James inside himself in POA, he will likely come to terms > with Lily's love and discover that power inside himself as well. And > hoo boy, will he need it! Voldemort will definitely be using Harry's > hatred of Snape to tempt him in Book 7 in my opinion, and Dumbledore > tried mightily to tell him his love will be his only protection > against the lure of Voldemort's power. Luckily we can count on Harry > figuring this out in time to save himself from the temptation to kill > Snape and get on with the business of Voldemort. > > And for anyone who likes the game of Clue: Harry defeating Voldemort > in the locked room with the gong spell. How about Harry in the Locked Room with the Candlestick? Since love is sometimes represented by a lit candle. Debbie [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Mon Jan 2 14:00:20 2006 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Mon, 02 Jan 2006 14:00:20 -0000 Subject: "Stand aside, girl" and the End In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 145722 Jen Reese: > My thoughts keep drifting to Godric's Hollow and I'm wondering > again why Voldemort gave Lily the chance to stand aside. ...the > idea that Voldemort would save Lily because Snape (or anyone) > asked him to doesn't fit for me. > The second most common suggestion is that Voldemort thought Lily > too silly to bother with since his laser focus was on killing > James and Harry. This one, too, falls flat for me. Lily had thrice > defied him.... > > ...there's this quote by JKR: > > "Now the important thing about Harry's mother, the really, really > significant thing, you're going to find out in 2 parts. You'll find > out a lot more about her in Book 5, or you'll find out something > very significant about her in Book 5, then you'll find out > something incredibly important about her in Book 7. But I can't > tell you what those things are so I'm sorry, but yes, you will > find out more about her because both of them are very important in > what Harry ends up having to do." (The Connection, 1999) > > JKR said there were places Harry needed to go in Book 5 in order > to 'play fair for the reader in the resolution of Book 7'. So the > Department of Mysteries will be important again. I'm not the first > to suggest Lily worked there, it's just that now the idea she > might have worked in the Veil room and studied death takes on a > new meaning given the information about Voldemort in HBP. His > greatest fear is death, and Dumbledore is the only person he > feared probably in part because he was unafraid to die, so it's > fitting Voldemort might find Lily worrisome if she actually > studied death rather than feared it. SSSusan: I really, really like this possibility. In spite of the fact that I've long clung to LOLLIPOPS as a possible explanation for some of Snape's actions, I've never been able to buy the "Voldy offered to let her live as a reward for Snape" explanation for "Stand aside." As you noted, it just does NOT fit with the Voldy we know -- in particular with the person who instantly ordered the murder of Cedric as a mere "spare." I also definitely don't think he UNDERestimated Lily's talents nor her danger to him. *Thrice* defying is a pretty significant history of peskiness. Yes, he used the word "silly" but I don't think he meant it as a way of showing he didn't think her even worthy of consideration; I think he meant it as a general insult (for her peskiness!) and perhaps as a means of showing his disdain for the things she valued, compared to the things that REALLY mattered in his opinion. One other possibility I've heard raised is that Voldy didn't truly mean the "stand aside" as an offer to Lily that she could be spared, so much as that Voldy was just so focused on Harry that he wasn't paying attention to her. That has always felt a little weak as an explanation, too. The particular phrasing of the words seems too strong to me to be throw-away or insignificant. What I especially like in what Jen is proposing about Lily studying Death and not fearing it is that Voldy may have then had reason to find her "troublesome" or "worrisome" and so didn't want to mess with her unless he had to. He might have hated the Potters for all they represented -- their loyalty to DD, their fight against him, the values they espoused, their defiance of him, and now their having generated this progeny which might be the one with the power he knew not (whatever that might be) -- but he might especially have been inclined to avoid Lily that night if, as Jen says, she was studying death, the thing Voldy feared most. I think a lot of people think that Lily worked in the locked room and that what is studied there is Love. But I think her studying death makes MORE sense. Yes, she KNEW about love and understood its power, because she used it to protect Harry. And Voldy already admitted that Lily had used an ancient magic, that he should have considered that and remembered it as a possibility, but it seems to me that the reason he DIDN'T remember it was because it was based on love, and love isn't on his radar screen. Might he not have mentioned, "I should have remembered it -- after all, it's what your mother studied," if that were the case? No, I think he admitted that he should have known about that, simply because he'd studied magic in such depth, but he didn't think of it because he devalued it. So if he devalued anything love-related, WHY offer to let Lily save herself? What makes more sense to me is this possibility -- that Voldy knew about Lily's work studying DEATH, which most definitely *was* on his radar screen. For this reason, perhaps, he was a little more concerned about her, a little more worried about what she might be capable of? Heck, maybe his plan was even to turn back to her after he'd eliminated Harry and see if he couldn't extract information from her about what she'd learned? He might have thought of her both as dangerous AND as potentially useful in his quest to avoid death and achieve immortality. Jen wrote: > Lily would then be an example of someone possessing great love and > no fear of death. Even though Harry possesses great quantities of > love, he underestimates its power just as Voldemort does. Since > Harry found the courage of James inside himself in POA, he will > likely come to terms with Lily's love and discover that power > inside himself as well. And hoo boy, will he need it! > Voldemort will definitely be using Harry's hatred of Snape to > tempt him in Book 7 in my opinion, and Dumbledore tried mightily > to tell him his love will be his only protection against the lure > of Voldemort's power. Luckily we can count on Harry figuring this > out in time to save himself from the temptation to kill Snape and > get on with the business of Voldemort. SSSusan: There's also the idea that, if Lily did study death, it might play out in that one of Harry's strengths is something he holds in common with his mother and with Dumbledore: not fearing death. I've long believed that what Harry would do to defeat Voldemort would somehow involve sacrificial love -- the willingness to die out of love for others. (I've also always hoped that the mere belief in this power and WILLINGNESS to take that action, to sacrifice himself, will prove to be sufficient and he won't actually have to die... but that's just the "happy ending" person in me talking.) Anyway, I think this fits nicely with this whole notion Jen has presented. We *know* about the power of Love because of Lily's sacrifice, the ancient magic which protected Harry, and DD's stressing of it. We also know DD did not fear death, and Lily must not have either based upon her actions at GH. If she studied death, this would mesh nicely with that. Harry is notoriously brave and willing to put his life on the line for others (the Sorcerer's Stone, going after Ginny in CoS, taking the extra risk to bring back Cedric's body, trying to rescue Sirius), even if those actions have sometimes been rash and not-well-considered. But put together the importance of love and the lack of fear of death, and I think we're right back to sacrificial love. Course, as Jen notes, Harry's going to have to get his mind off of killing Snape first. ;-) Siriusly Snapey Susan From dragonjcndm2 at aol.com Mon Jan 2 05:34:27 2006 From: dragonjcndm2 at aol.com (dragonjcndm2 at aol.com) Date: Mon, 2 Jan 2006 00:34:27 EST Subject: Thestrals Again Message-ID: <26b.3647edf.30ea1563@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 145723 Steve/bboyminn: Notice the second stage ANGER, and how do we find Harry a few weeks later? Angry at the world, angry at everyone and everything that even remotely gives him an excuse to be angry. Frequently the anger of grieving is again subconscious, and is directed at everything but the one place where it really belongs. This makes sense in the beginning of OOTP when Harry feels everyone seems to have deserted him. Dumbledore, Ron, Hermione, even Sirius, because he practically hears nothing back from them all summer long. Even after he arrives at Grimmauld reunited with everyone, Harry is STILL angry at Ron and Hermione after they explained that they had promised Dumbledore they wouldn't reveal too much in their letters to him and trying to convince him that they wanted to. Anger which he expells later and then his noticing of the Thestrals. Jade Harry's To-Do List: 1. Get Up 2. Survive 3. Go Back To Bed From foxmoth at qnet.com Mon Jan 2 16:51:07 2006 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Mon, 02 Jan 2006 16:51:07 -0000 Subject: "Stand aside, girl" and the End In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 145724 > SSSusan: > I really, really like this possibility. In spite of the fact that > I've long clung to LOLLIPOPS as a possible explanation for some of > Snape's actions, I've never been able to buy the "Voldy offered to > let her live as a reward for Snape" explanation for "Stand aside." > As you noted, it just does NOT fit with the Voldy we know -- in > particular with the person who instantly ordered the murder of > Cedric as a mere "spare." > > What I especially like in what Jen is proposing about Lily studying > Death and not fearing it is that Voldy may have then had reason to > find her "troublesome" or "worrisome" and so didn't want to mess > with her unless he had to. Pippin: Voldemort kept Bertha Jorkins alive until he had extracted all the information she had to offer. It might be that Voldemort thought Lily knew something about Death, or perhaps about the Philosopher's Stone, and he intended to spare her until he had learned what she knew. But while it isn't in Voldemort's nature to honor his bargains, it isn't out of character for him to offer them, especially with those who aren't yet in his power or might be inclined to waver a bit. Think of Wormtail's silver hand, the gold Lucius jingled in front of Fudge, the crystallized pineapple that Riddle supplied to Slughorn and all the emotional support he lavished on Ginny. I don't think that Voldemort would have needed to offer Pettigrew a reward for betraying his friends. Fear was enough. But if there was someone else involved, someone a bit braver, someone who was close to Lily and whose allegiance to the good was wavering but not entirely lost... I do think there will be a showdown in the Veil room, but not with Voldemort. What I'm imagining now is that Harry will face Voldemort and defeat him, but discover that there is still one horcrux left. Possibly that will be Harry himself, or his scar. Harry will then go to the Veil room to destroy it, only to be met by EverSoEvil!Lupin, who will finally, to Harry's horror and astonishment reveal himself. That returns Lupin to the scene of Sirius's murder, which, if my theories hold up, was committed by Lupin not Bella. Maybe Harry can convince Lupin to take the last horcrux through the veil with him as a redemptive act. But my favorite idea is that they will both go through, and Harry will come out again through the room of love. Pippin From stevejjen at earthlink.net Mon Jan 2 16:49:40 2006 From: stevejjen at earthlink.net (Jen Reese) Date: Mon, 02 Jan 2006 16:49:40 -0000 Subject: "Stand aside, girl" and the End In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 145725 > SSSusan: > I really, really like this possibility. In spite of the fact that > I've long clung to LOLLIPOPS as a possible explanation for some of > Snape's actions, I've never been able to buy the "Voldy offered to > let her live as a reward for Snape" explanation for "Stand > aside." As you noted, it just does NOT fit with the Voldy we > know -- in particular with the person who instantly ordered the > murder of Cedric as a mere "spare." Jen: I definitely think LOLLIPOPS can stand on its own without the particularly icky part about Snape asking Lily be saved for him ;). Even though I'm not a fan of this particular lolly, it seems Snape would feel much more remorse if he turned Lily over to Voldemort and there was no turning back, rather than having the out of asking him to save Lily. In fact, it would diminish Snape's change of heart if he was still asking for favors from Voldemort. SSSusan: > I also definitely don't think he UNDERestimated Lily's talents nor > her danger to him. *Thrice* defying is a pretty significant > history of peskiness. Yes, he used the word "silly" but I don't > think he meant it as a way of showing he didn't think her even > worthy of consideration; I think he meant it as a general insult > (for her peskiness!) and perhaps as a means of showing his disdain > for the things she valued, compared to the things that REALLY > mattered in his opinion. Jen: 'You silly girl' does seem to invalidate the idea Lily had a power that concerned Voldemort, but it's not that different from how he treats Harry: "I have nothing more to say to you, Potter...you have irked me for too often, for too long. AVADA KEDAVRA!" (OOTP, chap. 36, p. 813). Voldemort appears to be belittling Harry as just a bother, yet he's actually one of Voldemort's greatest concerns because of the prophecy. Pesky like his mom, yes, irksome, but *quite* concerning. I think Lily was the same in his eyes. SSSuan: > I think a lot of people think that Lily worked in the locked room > and that what is studied there is Love. But I think her studying > death makes MORE sense. Yes, she KNEW about love and understood > its power, because she used it to protect Harry. Jen: Studying death definitely makes more sense for Voldemort's actions, and I like the idea Lily innately understood love magic rather than studied it. That way she and Harry are mirror images: Lily understood the power of love and compassion from the start as evidenced in the Pensieve scene, then she studied and overcame any fear of death. Harry had an innate understanding about self- sacrifice and lacked fear of death from the beginning, but will need to internalize what Dumbledore has taught him, probably with post- humous help from Lily. That scenario would also serve to make Lily a little less perfect in her characterization, if self-sacrifice was something she grew into through her studies of death and feeling the protective love of being a parent. Wouldn't it be neat for Harry to discover he inspired the courage within his mom to help her sacrifice herself? I'd be pulling out the tissue box over that one . Also, I hope information about Dumbledore will show that he had barriers to overcome in learning about love magic and not fearing death. Maybe this is where Grindelwald will come in (as well as for the plot information of Riddle learning more about horcruxes). SSSusan: > What makes more sense to me is this possibility -- that Voldy knew > about Lily's work studying DEATH, which most definitely *was* on > his radar screen. For this reason, perhaps, he was a little more > concerned about her, a little more worried about what she might be > capable of? Heck, maybe his plan was even to turn back to her > after he'd eliminated Harry and see if he couldn't extract > information from her about what she'd learned? He might have > thought of her both as dangerous AND as potentially useful in his > quest to avoid death and achieve immortality. Jen: Heck yeah, I like that idea. Wonder what they study in the Veil room? Hey, that just made me wonder if part of the reason Voldemort didn't want to go to the DOM to get the prophecy himself was fear of the Veil room? Bella said it was because he didn't want the MOM to know he was back and that makes strategic sense, but Voldemort is a man consumed by irrational fears and obsessions. He visits the DOM via Nagini and discovers the protection ain't that great--why doesn't he just use all his magical power to enter at night by stealth and grab the prophecy himself? Instead he develops this elaborate plan for Harry to take it. Hmmmm. SSSusan: > I've long believed that what Harry would do to defeat Voldemort > would somehow involve sacrificial love -- the willingness to die > out of love for others. (I've also always hoped that the mere > belief in this power and WILLINGNESS to take that action, to > sacrifice himself, will prove to be sufficient and he won't > actually have to die... but that's just the "happy ending" person > in me talking.) Jen: It does seem all roads are leading this way. Dumbledore didn't spend Harry's sixth year preparing him for battle, he spent it helping Harry understand where Voldemort is strong and where he's weak. Dumbledore, at least, thinks Harry has everything he needs to defeat Voldemort just as he is. Like you said, Harry's ability to not care what happens to him while saving others is his strongest characteristic. I keep thinking of Mad-Eye in the movie GOF, 'play to your strengths' . SSSusan: > Course, as Jen notes, Harry's going to have to get his mind off of > killing Snape first. ;-) Jen: Hee. The BIG task at hand, methinks. His hatred is making him weak. Jen R., enjoying a day off to get caught up on posts. From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Mon Jan 2 16:58:55 2006 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Mon, 02 Jan 2006 16:58:55 -0000 Subject: Love and Vengeance (WAS: The Dursleys and Being Nice and Civil) In-Reply-To: <80f25c3a0601020540w5577ed14i54b32c21fb8b376@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 145726 Debbie wrote: >>> ...it is the act of sacrifice as an expression of love, not the love itself, that strikes me as extraordinary. For love itself to be extraordinary, it must extend beyond those friends and family that are the usual and expected objects of that love. And it must reject vengeance.<<< SSSusan: Interesting that I had not read this post before I submitted my response to Jen Reese in the "Stand aside, girl" thread, because I also ended up discussing the act of sacrifice as an expression of love in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/145722. What *I* really appreciate, though, Debbie, is this comment of yours -- >>>Furthermore, is vengeance really consistent with Harry's purity of heart? Harry's purity of heart has now saved him from Voldemort at least three times. First, in PS/SS, it allowed him to retrieve the Stone. In CoS it brought Fawkes and Gryffindor's sword to him. And in GoF phoenix song gave him courage because of his purity of heart. It plays a role elsewhere as well. In both OOP and HBP he has tried to cast Unforgivable Curses, but failed in both attempts. Snape tells him during his escape from Hogwarts that Harry lacks the nerve or the ability. I think that's true, but the reason why is is purity of heart.<<< SSSusan: I think this is the extra step I had not included in my vision for the ending. IOW, it's not *just* sacrificial love ? or an act of sacrifice made out of love ? it's the REJECTION of vengeance, as well, which would make Harry's action so extraordinary. Some people pooh-pooh Harry's purity of heart, but it's one of those things that JKR has given us which I buy into wholeheartedly (pardon the pun). There is purity of heart in Harry. NO, he's not perfect - ? purity of heart does not equal perfection, imo -- but he has a purity of heart which has manifested itself numerous times. So how *could* purity of heart & a thirst for vengeance coincide? It's an excellent question and perhaps the CRUX of things for understanding JKR's worldview, no? Debbie: >>>According to Fantastic Beasts, the phoenix "has never been known to kill." Thus, I associate Harry's purity of heart with the renunciation of vengeance.<<< SSS: I love this last bit! Debbie, thank you for dragging that in from Fantastic Beasts! I do believe it is excellent support for the notion that Harry *will* have to renounce vengeance. The Order of the Phoenix, Fawkes the phoenix as DD's pet (or familiar?), the phoenix "rescue" in CoS, the phoenix-song dome in GoF, the phoenix feather in Harry's wand -- there is so MUCH in the phoenix and its symbolism for the HP books that I think we'd be foolish to ignore any clues about them. Debbie went on: >>>Despite his apparent resolve, Harry is far from eager to take on his task. "`I've got to find them and destroy them and then I've got to go after the seventh bit of Voldemort's soul, the bit that's still in his body, and I'm the one who's going to kill him. And if I meet Severus Snape along the way,' he added, 'so much the better for me, so much the worse for him.'" He's preparing hinself to kill Voldemort because he thinks it's what Dumbledore wanted him to do. But it's almost as though his resolve is hardened by the thought of meeting Snape along the way and avenging Dumbledore's death. But we know that's not going to happen. The inclusion of Snape in his thinking here seems a sure sign that he does not yet understand the nature of his mission.<<< SSSusan: Yes again. It's going to be a fascinating trip for Harry in this final year! So many of us expect Harry will have to battle mightily against his hatred of Snape, his anger against him for all he's done, most especially for the killing of DD. And there is, of course, his desire for vengeance against Voldy in addition. HOW in the world is Harry going to get past this? Debbie already pointed out how Harry's actions in the Shrieking Shack (not killing Sirius, not allowing Sirius & Remus to kill Pettigrew) give an indication that he *might* well be inclined to set aside vengeance for "the right thing" (summarized by Debbie thusly: "Harry has shown flashes of the higher justice that mercy represents"). I may be misreading HBP, but in my reading of it, I felt a wee glimpse of empathy from Harry for Tom Riddle and his mother. That just might be key in his letting go of vengeance with Voldemort. But Snape? How's Harry going to get past that? In my view, the only way will be for Harry to learn ? from *someone, somehow* -- what Snape's role really was in DD's death, which would, of course, require a DDM!Snape as well as someone stepping in to provide the details. There are several possibilities for how this might happen in Book 7, and it's something which I'm most anticipating/hoping for about that book. WHATEVER happens, though, I think there's a lot of growth and discernment yet in store for our Harry. Debbie: >>> I've written in the past that I am attracted to Horcrux!Harry theories because it would allow him to defeat Voldemort through his own self-sacrifice rather than by killing him outright. While I still like that idea (and believe that Harry will demonstrate a willingness to sacrifice himself, I don't believe that the denouemont of the series will be Harry's death (by sacrifice or otherwise, and whether or not he is a horcrux). Instead, I think Harry will discover that the key to vanquishing Voldemort is love, exemplified by mercy. Voldemort will understand that he is wholly dependent on Harry's mercy. And Harry, being pure in heart, will grant it.<<< SSSusan: Again, we're in the same place ? I envision it as a WILLINGNESS to sacrifice himself which won't actually need to come to fruition or somehow won't result in his death. I'm not fond of Horcrux!Harry, but if that's the way to accomplish this, then I'm for it in spite of my dislike of it. ;-) I know there are list members who are *not at all* fond of this idea of letting go of vengeance, of granting mercy. Again though, I think we're at the CRUX of the issue: What is *JKR's* inclination here? What is *her* view of Good, Right, Fair and Just? I'm inclined to agree with Debbie that it's likely to revolve around mercy and a renunciation of vengeance. I totally *understand* why some would not find that "fair" nor satisfying, but since it's rather in alignment with my own view of things (and with DD's as well, I believe), then I know I'm in pretty good shape if something of this sort occurred. Debbie: >>> So why does Dumbledore insist that Harry has 'got to' try to kill Voldemort? Perhaps Dumbledore is simply acknowledging that the desire for revenge is a natural human response to grief. Perhaps he has not yet discerned how Harry can use the power of love as a weapon as well as a shield. Perhaps Dumbledore knows that it can be channelled into a higher form of justice, but realizes that Harry must discern for himself how to do that. In fact, the mercy Dumbledore is willing to grant to Draco on the Astronomy Tower seems much closer to the "Love thine enemies" quote than it does to his approval of Harry's "furious desire for revenge." He doesn't just forgive Draco; he offers him a shot at redemption. Maybe Dumbledore's actions on the Tower foreshadow the final confrontation.<<< SSSusan: Exactly. I think DD may not have it all totally figured out, but I do think he believes firmly in "a higher form of justice," in love over vengeance, and in mercy. I'll grant that there seems a little inconsistency just now in the language DD uses, but I think his actions as a whole speak to love, second chances, forgiveness, mercy and sacrifice. Will eat the necessary crow later if necessary, of course. Siriusly Snapey Susan From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Mon Jan 2 17:06:18 2006 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Mon, 02 Jan 2006 17:06:18 -0000 Subject: "Stand aside, girl" and the End In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 145727 Jen Reese wrote: > > My thoughts keep drifting to Godric's Hollow and I'm wondering again > why Voldemort gave Lily the chance to stand aside. Now that JKR has > given us a better picture of the way Voldemort thinks and his > particular obsessions and patterns, the idea that Voldemort would save > Lily because Snape (or anyone) asked him to doesn't fit for me. Alla: Lovely post, Jen and even though I think that this idea of somebody ( Snape or Peter) asking Voldemort to spare Lily is possible, I certainly think that what you are saying is possible too ( it could even be both IMO), but I need a clarification on something. Keep reading :-) Jen Reese: > The second most common suggestion is that Voldemort thought Lily too > silly to bother with since his laser focus was on killing James and > Harry. Alla: Yes, on this one I am with you. I don't buy it at all. Jen Reese: > JKR said there were places Harry needed to go in Book 5 in order > to 'play fair for the reader in the resolution of Book 7'. So the > Department of Mysteries will be important again. His greatest fear is death, > and Dumbledore is the only person he feared probably in part because > he was unafraid to die, so it's fitting Voldemort might find Lily > worrisome if she actually studied death rather than feared it. I also > think the locked room is a possibility too, perhaps Lily studied both, > but since Voldemort fears death and underestimates love it seems more > likely Lily working in the Veil room would give him pause. Alla: Right, so here are my questions. First of all, how did Voldemort find out that Lily worked in the Veil room or Love room, if she indeed did? Just asking for your speculations, of course. Snape or Peter or something else? Why would Voldemort find Lily studying death worrisome? Because he may think that she is ahead of him in his immortality quest or something like that and him killing her will not work? I am still not sure why he would not try though? He certainly tries to kill Dumbledore in the battle of MoM, no? I mean, I understand Voldemort finding Lily to be a powerful and worthy opponent, but if we are to believe Voldemort when he brags to his DE during Graveyard, didn't he figure out that Lily invoked ancient magic which he underestimated only after the fact? I mean, I am not saying at all that we have to believe Voldemort, because he is certainly proven to be a liar( even per JKR interviews), but just in case he was telling the truth? I don't know it just does not make sense to me that even if Voldemort WAS afraid of Lily or whatever she was studying of a great deal that he would not TRY to kill her. IMO of course. Questions, questions. Come to think of it, how do you think Voldemort came to know AT ALL about what happened as result of Lily sacrifice and whatever magic Dumbledore involved to protect Harry? It is not like Dumbledore gave him a detailed report, right? :-) I think I am missing something obvious here again. Sorry, I think I started rambling. Jen Reese: Even though Harry possesses great quantities of love, he > underestimates its power just as Voldemort does. Since Harry found the > courage of James inside himself in POA, he will likely come to terms > with Lily's love and discover that power inside himself as well. Alla: Yes, it think it is very likely. Jen Reese: And > hoo boy, will he need it! Voldemort will definitely be using Harry's > hatred of Snape to tempt him in Book 7 in my opinion, and Dumbledore > tried mightily to tell him his love will be his only protection > against the lure of Voldemort's power. Luckily we can count on Harry > figuring this out in time to save himself from the temptation to kill > Snape and get on with the business of Voldemort. Alla: I think on that we differ a gret deal or maybe I am wrong and I misunderstood you. I think that if JKR wanted to play the temptation theme for Harry, book 6 was a perfect place to do so AND I believe that the book belonging to Half Blood prince WAS the temptation in front of Harry, which he sort of fallen for, IMO. And it does not seem to me that any grand scale temptation will occur in book 7, IMO of course. I think at the end of book 6, Harry established himself as Dumbledore man through and through and for him there is no going back. ( I would prefer Harry establishing himself as his own man through and through at the end of book 7, by the way :-))I don't think that he will fall for any of his Lordship tricks, he will be too focused for that. Now, I agree with you that he will discover power of Love in himself fully and his forgiveness of Snape will somehow play into it, but I doubt that it will be connected with Voldemort tempting Harry to come to the Dark side. :-) IMO of course. JMO, Alla From vuurdame at xs4all.nl Mon Jan 2 17:06:21 2006 From: vuurdame at xs4all.nl (festuco) Date: Mon, 02 Jan 2006 17:06:21 -0000 Subject: Thestrals Again In-Reply-To: <26b.3647edf.30ea1563@aol.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 145728 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, dragonjcndm2 at a... wrote: > This makes sense in the beginning of OOTP when Harry feels everyone seems to > have deserted him. Dumbledore, Ron, Hermione, even Sirius, because he > practically hears nothing back from them all summer long. Even after he arrives at > Grimmauld reunited with everyone, Harry is STILL angry at Ron and Hermione after > they explained that they had promised Dumbledore they wouldn't reveal too much > in their letters to him and trying to convince him that they wanted to. Anger > which he expells later and then his noticing of the Thestrals. > Actually I think that this was a different anger: is the very real anger anybody would have felt when things were decided for Harry over his head. He -was- attacked by the dementors and now faced a cuurt hearing instead of support, he -was- stuck at the Dursleys and he -was- left out. No matter that Hermione and Ron had promised not to tell, the fact that -they- knew and he did not while -he- was Nr 1. on Voldemorts hit list hurt a lot, had just escaped him only weeks ago and saw Cedric get killed. I think the hurting was real, the anger was real, but it also was enlarged by the traumatic events he had witnessed. Basically, anger is often caused by powerlessness and in most of OotP Harry was very powerless. Gerry From gbethman at yahoo.com Mon Jan 2 10:19:41 2006 From: gbethman at yahoo.com (Gopal B) Date: Mon, 2 Jan 2006 02:19:41 -0800 (PST) Subject: Potion in the Cave In-Reply-To: <1136194272.1037.41517.m19@yahoogroups.com> Message-ID: <20060102101941.1628.qmail@web33511.mail.mud.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 145729 Hi, I have seen many emails that mention the potion in the cave is Voldemort's potion/ memories/ dark magic. How is Harry to continue in the quest for the horcrux? We can think of two different possibilities on the cave horcrux. 1) Voldemort placed the horcrux there himself (seems like the kinda thing LV would do). R.A.B found out the location and took the horcrux much like Dumbledore-Harry. 2) Voldemort asked R.A.B to put the horcrux in the cave and R.A.B did everything else but put the horcrux there. In either case, LV would not know the horcrux to be missing unless a) he checked the cave or b) someone with R.A.B spilled the beans. In scenario 1), the potion would be filled by R.A.B with the intent to 'kill'/damage LV and was not meant for Dumbledore-Harry. This is again because the potion did not fill itself after Dumbledore consumed it. If it was RAB's potion then it would be 100% poisonous and going by AD's reaction it probably was. In scenario 2), the potion can be LV's dark magic. Given that horcrux is a precious thing to LV, lesser probability that 2) would be true. So the key questions are: 1) How did LV know of the missing horcrux and R.A.B's treason? 2) Did LV get back the horcrux or not? apparently he did not, why did he not try to get it back? did he make one extra? 3) who put the potion in the cave and what did it do to Dumbledore? Guess the wizarding world is less logical than we think and we might have a completely different start for the horcrux hunt. Gopal. From ornawn at 013.net Mon Jan 2 17:33:52 2006 From: ornawn at 013.net (ornadv) Date: Mon, 02 Jan 2006 17:33:52 -0000 Subject: C!M Imperius/no more dueling Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 145730 ?? Potioncat: > I happened to be back in 2002 and found this comment by Eloise in > post 336329 > > Crouch could reasonably expect that > he would > > do anything to make his own champion win, including Imperio'ing > Harry to > > throw the tournament. Harry, from Crouch/Moody's POV needed to be > able to > > resist if he was to be sure of winning. > > > > Eloise Orna: Actually Fake!Moody says it??s twice that it??s on DD??s orders that he teaches them the curses, and how to resist the Imperious Curse, so I think he hadn??t much choice in it. Harry seemed to know intuitively how to resist the curse, at least a little bit, so I wouldn??t grant Fake!Moody too many points on this. Perhaps he had some personal involvement in wanting to try to understand Harry??s powers. WW and DE in particular want to understand how come that Harry escaped, and defeated Voldemort as baby. It??s McGonagall??s question to DD, Harry??s as well, and it seems that every De is preoccupied by it. Riddle in CoS and GoF acts around this issue, asking, trying to prove Harry hasn??t got powers etc. I think that Fake!Moody acts the same way ?V he tries to measure Harry??s powers. As to teaching him to resist ?V as I said, I believe its DD??s orders. >kchuplis >Indeed, we know that it was the wands and the effect of brother >wands not fighting that had the most to do with Harry's escape. >Hmmm. So, that begs another point...we know LV won't "duel" again >so the denouement is going to have to be done in some other way. Orna: About further duelling - I rather think voldemort would tamper with his wand, than giving up the final duel. Perhaps, as someone suggested, that's why Ollivander has disappeared. Orna From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Mon Jan 2 17:42:59 2006 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Mon, 02 Jan 2006 17:42:59 -0000 Subject: Love and Vengeance (WAS: The Dursleys and Being Nice and Civil) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 145731 > SSSusan: > I think this is the extra step I had not included in my vision for > the ending. IOW, it's not *just* sacrificial love ? or an act of > sacrifice made out of love ? it's the REJECTION of vengeance, as > well, which would make Harry's action so extraordinary. > > Some people pooh-pooh Harry's purity of heart, but it's one of those > things that JKR has given us which I buy into wholeheartedly (pardon > the pun). There is purity of heart in Harry. NO, he's not perfect - > ? purity of heart does not equal perfection, imo -- but he has a > purity of heart which has manifested itself numerous times. So how > *could* purity of heart & a thirst for vengeance coincide? It's an > excellent question and perhaps the CRUX of things for understanding > JKR's worldview, no? Alla: I don't know if they cannot be together though, love and vengeance, I mean. Let me try to explain and if I start rambling, let me know, OK? I read Debbie's wonderful post and I am fully with her and with you too, I guess that Harry will not kill Voldemort. He just won't. We also don't know for sure that Dumbledore killed Grindewauld, because the card says " defeated", right? So, whatever happens, Harry will not be the killer, BUT do we have any doubt, I mean REALLY does anybody have any doubt that by the end of book 7 Lord Voldemort will be no more? So, Harry will not commit murder, but something will eradicate, destroy Voldemort SOMEHOW, right? I mean, maybe some readers think that Lord Voldemort will triumph at the end, then my argument will make no sense at all for those readers, I guess. Therefore Lord Voldemort will get what is coming to him, even though Harry may even feel some pity for the boy who was once Tom Riddle or something like that. So, IMO we will get both things, mercy and sort vengeance form of justice. Same thing with Snape - now if you believe that he is a good guy, then Harry will discover that he was wrong all over again about poor Severus and will pity him and forgive him and will go his merry way to deal with Voldemort, or something like that. I have faith in JKR's writing abilities, I am sure she can pull off even such scenario well ( even though it is indeed truly not my favorable one), BUT if you believe that Snape needs to get what is coming to him for many bad deeds he committed during his life time, as I definitely do, I don't see that Harry's forgiveness and Snape's punishment should be mutually exclusive. So far, JKR had not let me down in providing SOME kind of comeuppance to all characters that I consider either bad guys or those who committed some sort of bad deeds, I don't see why Snape would be an exception. IMO of course. I am sure that Harry will not kill Snape, that is IMO is a given, I don't even think that Harry will cast any Unforgivables on Snape, BUT I also think that at some point in book 7, Snape WILL stand absolutely powerless at Harry's mercy AND I think Snape will hate it very much. That would be SUFFICIENT for me to see Snape powerless even for a brief moment in time ( for all six years of Harry being powerless in front of Snape), you know, maybe at this point in time Harry will already know that he is going to forgive Snape for whatever reason, but Snape will not know it and as I said will hate it. So, after that moment, if Harry gives Snape forgiveness, I would think that justice was served, you know. :-) As I mentioned, another favorite form of justice for Snape to me will be Lily's host appearing and giving him a nice lecture how he treated Harry all those years, that is if LOLLIPOPS is true of course. That would not be even justice served by Harry, he may have already discovered that Snape is really a fluffy bunny :-) and still it will be sufficient for me. > Will eat the necessary crow later if necessary, of course. > > Siriusly Snapey Susan Alla: Oh me too, me too of course. We should exchange recipes. :-) JMO, Alla From rstiegel at yahoo.com Mon Jan 2 05:16:29 2006 From: rstiegel at yahoo.com (Rachael) Date: Mon, 02 Jan 2006 05:16:29 -0000 Subject: "Stand aside, girl" and the End In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 145732 I really like this theory; it is much more believable than Voldemort giving her the choice as a favor to Snape. The only thing is, I don't think Voldemort would hesitate to kill someone he feared and/or give them a choice to live or die. I think he would only give someone a choice between death or a life serving him/ So it seems that there is something he thought he could learn from Lily. If she had special knowledge about love and death from working in the Department of Mysteries, he would want to know this, but couldn't he just d Leglimency and then AK her? She must have had some special ability for him to even consider wanting her to keep her alive. Also even though Voldemort sparing Lily because of Snape does seem inconsistent with his character, I think Voldemort makes exceptions for Snape. He's a very special Death Eater. Rachael From foxmoth at qnet.com Mon Jan 2 17:44:28 2006 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Mon, 02 Jan 2006 17:44:28 -0000 Subject: Real child abuse/ Snape again In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 145733 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Jen Reese" wrote: > > > > Pippin: > > > Oh, I disagree. We do see other teachers abuse their power. > > > I think telling a student he is fated to die is an abuse of > > > power. > > > Alla: > > Yeah, sure. I will agree with that, and if Trelawney would have > > done it every single lesson, I would even agree with you that it > > is an emotional abuse. > > Jen: This point reminded me of Trelawney's and Harry's discussion in > HBP: > > "I miss having you in my classes, Harry," she said, soulfully as > they set off together. "You were never much of a Seer....but you > were a wonderful Object...." Harry did not reply; he had loathed > being the Object of Professor Trelawney's continual predictions of > doom. (The Seer Overheard, p. 544, Scholastic) > > That bothered me, about Harry being the Object. I know that's just > psychic talk, but the fact that Trelawney is basically 'fessing up > to using Harry and then finding out how deeply Harry hated being in > that position did make me think of a teacher abusing her power. I > hadn't realized quite how much Harry hated it until JKR used the > word 'loathed' which is usually reserved for Snape . > Pippin: Yes, exactly. Trelawney's constant predictions of an early demise are just as regular a feature of Harry's life as Snape's insults. But though Harry is extremely upset at first, he eventually learns not to take her seriously. It doesn't require any apologies or forgiveness, and Harry doesn't have to tell her off. He is able to separate his loathing of being an Object from his feelings about Trelawney herself; she's annoying, but he doesn't hate *her.* It comes as a pleasant surprise when she changes tack and predicts something nice about him for once, something about minister for magic and fourteen children, IIRC, but he's not obsessed with getting her to do it. He does, however, regularly cheat on his divination homework, imagining all the disasters he can, and he's highly pleased when Trelawney praises him for it. Then he's highly deceptive about his sudden expertise in potions in HBP. It's that craving for approval, I think. He doesn't want at all to be palsy-walsy with Slughorn, he doesn't like him very much, and yet he can't resist trying to earn his praise. I think it just drove Harry up the wall that there was no way he could get Snape to approve of him. It's that, IMO, more than the insults themselves, that made him hate Snape. But as Dumbledore said, there's no getting approval from everybody. Comparing Snape to Trelawney made me see that quite apart from Snape's feelings about James, he would seize on Harry as the object of disdain in his first class because of who Harry is. Just as Trelawney's prediction is far more dramatic because it concerns the Boy Who Lived, Snape's demonstration that Harry is the sort of dunderhead he usually has to teach is far more dramatic because Harry already commands the attention of his classmates, and indeed the whole WW. Like Snape, Trelawney also makes use of Neville's obvious nervousness -- she psychs him into breaking a teacup. Trelawney's methods, by the way, are no secret. McGonagall is quite aware of her habit of predicting the deaths of students. So this sort of thing is known and tolerated at Hogwarts. McGonagall doesn't think much of it, but she's not putting a stop to it either. What I was trying to get at is not Hogwarts as bootcamp, but Hogwarts as the sort of environment a kid faces if s/he is, say, training to be a concert pianist or a competitive figure skater. Public failure and adult style rivalries are part of the game and anyone who participates at the higher levels can expect to face them, maybe not from their primary trainer (that would be a fiasco, as it was in Harry's case with the occlumency lessons), but certainly in the course of their studies. Pippin From horridporrid03 at yahoo.com Mon Jan 2 17:50:17 2006 From: horridporrid03 at yahoo.com (horridporrid03) Date: Mon, 02 Jan 2006 17:50:17 -0000 Subject: Real child abuse/ Snape again In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 145734 > >>Alla: > > Torturing Draco - sorry, I will sign it off to rough justice again > and I think that Real!Moody would not have been above doing it. > IMO of course. > Betsy Hp: Now how on earth am I supposed to take your opinions about child abuse seriously when you say torturing a child is okay? That *is* what you're saying, yes? Dropping a transfigured Draco onto a stone floor from such a hight he actually bounces is fine and dandy. Catching Harry in the middle of a wrong doing and calling him on it is abuse. I'm sorry, but your logic completely escapes me. I'd also like to think that the real Moody would beg to differ with your view that he'd eagerly torture a child. After all, Sirius told us he tried not to use the Unforgivables to fight the Death Eaters. Throwing an Imperius at Bellatrix seems much more forgivable, to my mind, than using a form of physical and emotional torture on a schoolboy. I'd like to think the real Moody would agree. Now, Umbridge, on the other hand, I think she'd agree with you completely. She's all about "rough justice". Betsy Hp From foxmoth at qnet.com Mon Jan 2 17:57:24 2006 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Mon, 02 Jan 2006 17:57:24 -0000 Subject: C!M Imperius/no more dueling In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 145735 > > Orna: > > Actually Fake!Moody says it??s twice that it??s on DD??s orders that he > teaches them the curses, and how to resist the Imperious Curse, so I > think he hadn??t much choice in it. Harry seemed to know intuitively > how to resist the curse, at least a little bit, so I wouldn??t grant > Fake!Moody too many points on this. > Perhaps he had some personal involvement in wanting to try to > understand Harry??s powers. WW and DE in particular want to > understand how come that Harry escaped, and defeated Voldemort as > baby. It??s McGonagall??s question to DD, Harry??s as well, and it > seems that every De is preoccupied by it. Riddle in CoS and GoF acts > around this issue, asking, trying to prove Harry hasn??t got powers > etc. I think that Fake!Moody acts the same way ?V he tries to measure > Harry??s powers. As to teaching him to resist ?V as I said, I believe > its DD??s orders. Pippin: We can't be sure that Harry actually fought off the imperius that Fake!Moody put on him. It'd be easy enough for Fake!Moody to lift the spell non-verbally and lie about it, tricking Harry into thinking that he'd fought it successfully. Then, when Harry faced Voldemort's Imperius, he "knew", just like with the patronus spell, that he'd done it before. I don't think Fake!Moody would think Harry needed to learn to resist Imperius to defeat the other champions, since all that really mattered from his point of view was that Harry be first to reach the cup. Harry's standing in the contest as a whole wasn't a concern. Pippin From bartl at sprynet.com Mon Jan 2 18:24:35 2006 From: bartl at sprynet.com (Bart Lidofsky) Date: Mon, 02 Jan 2006 13:24:35 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: The Dursleys In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <43B96FE3.1000209@sprynet.com> No: HPFGUIDX 145736 Steve wrote: > bboyminn: > According to Ron, Ron and Hermione are going to be with Harry at the > Dursley's house. Please, you must see the comic come-uppance potential > in that? Bart: Consider the fact that part of the entire series is based on the Wizarding Community's rather unusual conclusion not to take over the Muggle world, and a group within who disagree with this. For Harry & crew to take magical revenge on the Dursleys would be to become followers of Lord Voldemort. The Dursleys are so miserable anyway that, frankly, the best revenge would be to leave them alone. Bart From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Mon Jan 2 18:34:11 2006 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Mon, 02 Jan 2006 18:34:11 -0000 Subject: Real child abuse/ JKR intentions/ Snape again/Draco In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 145737 > > >>Alla: > > > > Torturing Draco - sorry, I will sign it off to rough justice again > > and I think that Real!Moody would not have been above doing it. > > IMO of course. > > > > Betsy Hp: > Now how on earth am I supposed to take your opinions about child > abuse seriously when you say torturing a child is okay? That *is* > what you're saying, yes? Dropping a transfigured Draco onto a stone > floor from such a height he actually bounces is fine and dandy. > Catching Harry in the middle of a wrong doing and calling him on it > is abuse. I'm sorry, but your logic completely escapes me. Alla: Huh? You are not SUPPOSED to take ANY of my opinions seriously, if you don't want to, Betsy. Just as I don't have to take any of your opinions seriously , if I don't want to. NO, I am not saying that torturing the child is Okay, but I am saying that making Draco bounce a few times is OK within the narrative? Why? Because of whom he is. You know, I am reading PoA right now and it made me realize once again how much I hate Draco and how much IMO he deserves EVERYTHING he gets and more. In RL I would not advocate teacher using ANY physical punishments on the child like EVER. Poor Draco, who comes to the first lesson of Hagrid's already with contempt for Hagrid and who could care less about what Hagrid says and what instructions he gives and after being hurt a little bit because he did not listen to those instructions, he surely puts on a wonderful performance throughout the books to condemn an innocent animal to death and Hagrid's fired of course. Oh, and let's not forget that Draco is being bounced as a result of him launching an attack FIRST. Disproportionate punishment? Sure it is. Deserved one? YES, IMO absolutely it is and simply because it is Draco Malfoy. I would not be as sure to say that it was deserved if it was any other character, even from Slytherin House. Unless of course Fake!Moody would manage to do the same thing to Snape for some reason, then I would have been applauding him too. ;) Betsy Hp: > I'd also like to think that the real Moody would beg to differ with > your view that he'd eagerly torture a child. After all, Sirius told > us he tried not to use the Unforgivables to fight the Death Eaters. Alla: Nope, Sirius said that Real!Moody tried to bring his enemies home alive, NOT that he never used unforgivables. "I'll say this for Moody, though, he never killed if he could help it. Always brought people alive where possible. He was tough, but he never descended to the level of DE" - GoF, paperback, p.532. But maybe he did not indeed use Unforgivables, how relevant is it to what fake!Moody did to Draco? He did not use Unforgivables on him either, didn't he? he punished Draco for attacking another student. Mcgonagall is not arguing that Draco does not have to be punished, does not she? She is just saying that Moody's methods are unacceptable. Personally, I find them quite fitting for Malfoy, VERY fitting in fact. JMO of course. > Julie: > Of course, these labels are not all mutually exclusive, except > perhaps DDM and ESE. DDM can flow into Grey, which can flow into LID, > etc, etc. The most believable Snape will have shades of several > qualities, just as real humans do. (Which is why DDM!Snape to me is > most definitely not analogous to Good!Snape or Hero!Snape, though > some insist on pressing that narrow definition.) Alla: Oh, Julie do tell, maybe you will convert me to DD!M Snape :-), because to me DD!M Snape is definitely analogous to Good!Snape, unless you are thinking of Snape which Severely Siguine postulated about - the one who kills Dumbledore to save his own life, but because he thinks that his life will be of value to good guys and of course in that scenario Dumbledore does not ask Snape to do him in. Is there any other DD!M Snape who is not Good!Snape? > Lupinlore: > > > > So, in a very real way, the HP stories are about child abuse > because > > we say they are about child abuse. JKR, I am sure, did not mean > for > > them to be about child abuse. But she doesn't have anymore right > than > > anybody else to determine what the stories are about. Her rights > > consist of signing autographs and cashing royalty checks. > > Julie: > Again, she cannot tell a reader what a book is about, as that > interpretation belongs to each individual reader. But she has the > right to say she was making no personal statement about child abuse > in the books (i.e. she can't say what the books are about, but she > can say what she *wrote* the books about). Which does give her a bit > more say about her own stories than simply signing autographs and > cashing royalty checks. Oh, and she gets to keep the copyright ;-) > Alla: Right, I agree with Lupinlore's but not quite and I also agree with your last paragraph, Julie. JKR CAN tell the readers what she meant the books to be about, even though interpretations belong to each individual reader AND personally I find her insights to be very helpful to interpret characters behavior. But I sort of disagree with lupinlore that she did not mean to raise the "child abuse" issue in the books. There was a quote that she says that Dudley is just as abused as Harry is, so IMO it is quite clear that at least in regard to Dursleys she IS raising the issue of child abuse in the books and meant us to think about it. I have NO clue whether she meant to raise the issue of child abuse in regard to Snape, although since she calls him a bully and teacher who abuses his power in her interviews, I don't think that it is unreasonable to think that she meant to raise this issue in regard to Snape too, because I think that " teacher bullying his students" and " teacher abusing his students" are two expressions which are quite close in its meanings, if not synonymous. But indeed even if JKR did not mean to portray Snape as child abuser and only meant to portray him as bully, AND meant for those two definitions to be completely different, it does not matter to me, because I see Snape as child abuser and that is good enough to me of course. JMO, Alla From xxneuman07xx at yahoo.com Mon Jan 2 02:02:58 2006 From: xxneuman07xx at yahoo.com (xxneuman07xx) Date: Mon, 02 Jan 2006 02:02:58 -0000 Subject: C!M Imperius/no more dueling In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 145738 kchuplis wrote: > So, that begs another point...we know LV won't "duel" again > so the denouement is going to have to be done in some other > way. I'm thinking that LV will try to kill someone (probably Harry), but then the AK will rebound because of the Power of Love, killing him instead. "Neuman" From kchuplis at alltel.net Mon Jan 2 18:24:22 2006 From: kchuplis at alltel.net (kchuplis) Date: Mon, 02 Jan 2006 18:24:22 -0000 Subject: C!M Imperius/no more dueling In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 145739 > >kchuplis > >Indeed, we know that it was the wands and the effect of brother > >wands not fighting that had the most to do with Harry's escape. > >Hmmm. So, that begs another point...we know LV won't "duel" again > >so the denouement is going to have to be done in some other way. > > Orna: > About further duelling - I rather think voldemort would tamper with > his wand, than giving up the final duel. Perhaps, as someone > suggested, that's why Ollivander has disappeared. This is true. Or, he might be forced to pick up someone elses wand. But in the end, I can't help but feel we've HAD the wand duels. Big ones. I seriously think that the end of LV will come in a different way. Is it really going to be Big Wand Duel #3? Honestly, it may all totally hinge on the ability to forgive. If Harry could *honestly* feel forgiveness for LV, it would IMO, make him completely impervious to LV, which might, in itself, be enough to kill him off, clear Harry of actually having to be a murderer (which, pointed out in OoTP, bothers him and he even says he can't kill people), would be totally in keeping of sacrificial love, and would be something that LV simply could not understand in any way shape or form. Could just confund him into oblivion. How this would be achieved, I certainly know not, but we've seen the other sides of things that makes us doubt what we know. Be a tidy way to finish and would provide the "proof" JKR talks about in slaying the "you aren't a Christian" she has mentioned (although, I have to say, I've no idea why she ever said this or worried about it enough to say something like it. If people can't see the morality issues in these works they haven't, apparently, read them.) kchuplis From kchuplis at alltel.net Mon Jan 2 18:08:05 2006 From: kchuplis at alltel.net (kchuplis) Date: Mon, 02 Jan 2006 18:08:05 -0000 Subject: "Stand aside, girl" and the End In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 145740 > Pippin: > Voldemort kept Bertha Jorkins alive until he had extracted all the > information she had to offer. It might be that Voldemort thought > Lily knew something about Death, or perhaps about the Philosopher's > Stone, and he intended to spare her until he had learned what she > knew. And let's not forget the CONSTANT harping about what a gifted, natural, phenomenal potion maker Lily was. I mean, to hear Slughorn talk, she was the most gifted witch he ever knew. Maybe Voldy thought she could be useful in that way. If you are as afraid of death as he is, just killing off Harry isn't going to make you feel you are safe from it forever.... > I do think there will be a showdown in the Veil room, but not with > Voldemort. What I'm imagining now is that Harry will face Voldemort > and defeat him, but discover that there is still one horcrux left. > Possibly that will be Harry himself, or his scar. Harry will then go to > the Veil room to destroy it, only to be met by EverSoEvil!Lupin, who > will finally, to Harry's horror and astonishment > reveal himself. That returns Lupin to the scene of Sirius's murder, > which, if my theories hold up, was committed by Lupin not > Bella. Wow. Evil!Lupin. I certainly hope not. That would be a rather deflating and unfair thing to readers since nothing has ever pointed in that direction. I still also do not believe in the Harry as a Horcrux thing. Just too convoluted plus, if Voldy could barely stand to be inside Harry two seconds at the DoM, I can't see how a piece of his sould could reside there for many years. kchpulis From kchuplis at alltel.net Mon Jan 2 18:13:59 2006 From: kchuplis at alltel.net (kchuplis) Date: Mon, 02 Jan 2006 18:13:59 -0000 Subject: C!M Imperius/no more dueling In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 145741 > Pippin: > We can't be sure that Harry actually fought off the imperius > that Fake!Moody put on him. It'd be easy enough for Fake!Moody > to lift the spell non-verbally and lie about it, tricking Harry > into thinking that he'd fought it successfully. Then, when Harry > faced Voldemort's Imperius, he "knew", just like with the > patronus spell, that he'd done it before. But he really HAD done it before in the case of the patronus, not just THOUGHT he had done it before. I don't see the two situations as being mutual. kchuplis From bawilson at citynet.net Mon Jan 2 05:23:40 2006 From: bawilson at citynet.net (Bruce Alan Wilson) Date: Mon, 2 Jan 2006 00:23:40 -0500 Subject: Mean is not abusive; Dudley; teaching; conservatism Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 145742 > Betsy Hp: > Honestly, you can pull up example after example of Snape > behaving badly. But, as Miles has said, being a scary, > badly behaved, unfair teacher is not abuse. Alla: > Yes, but if you interpret those examples as abuse, then > they are. BAW: This makes you sound like Lewis Carroll's Humpty-Dumpty. Miles: "I described Harry's reactions to *real* abuse by Umbridge, and this is totally different to his reactions to Snape. I do think that Rowling described the feelings of Harry and his reactions as the ones of an abused child because she wanted to show us, that Umbridge is not only "nasty" like Snape, but she is an abuser, a criminal." BAW: Interesting that many of the people who seem to be most harshly critical of Snape's behavior towards Harry haven't said 'boo' about Umbridge. Even if we concede--which I do not for a moment --that Snape is an abuser, Umbridge is far worse. Umbridge makes Snape look positively cuddly, and makes Uncle Vernon look like Santa Claus. Lupinlore: "Well, now that's really the nub, isn't it? I'm afraid trying to impose definitions, or even reach them by consensus, isn't going to work. It has never worked with the Dursleys, and I seriously doubt, in fact I'm certain, it will never work with Snape and his abusive behavior." BAW: What abusive behavior? Mean, yes. Unfair, yes. Harsh, yes. I have yet to see any time when he was abusive. Umbridge was abusive; the Dursleys were abusive. However, compared to what I have seen--I won't go into details--Snape doesn't come even close. Gerry: "True abuse would mean making derogatory remarks about Neville/Harry every couple of minutes. Deliberately chipping away at his self-confidence again and again every time they have potions. Giving random detentions as horrid as possible. And so on, and so on. Now we see Snape doing a little of that. And for Neville this is certainly not good. But true abuse is much, much worse. Could Snape be able of emotional abuse? Certainly. He knows how to wound and he has demonstrated he can be cruel. Does he do it. No, he does not enough for that." BAW: Precisely. Snape is a meanie; however, it takes a great deal more than being a meanie to be an abuser. hambtty: "Then I remembered a quote from JKR hinting that someone will become magical at a late age. Late age? What could be a late age - surely 17 is considered late in the WW. I know most think that it will be Mrs. Figg but surely she would have discovered her magic, if any by now. As for me, I think it is Dudley. " BAW: JKR has said that Dudley is just Dudley--what you see is what you get--and that neither he nor his mother will be the ones to become magical late bloomers. I've said it before--I think it will be Uncle Vernon. After all, who would be the most shocked at finding out in midlife that he was a sorcerer? La Gatta: "Snape's main focus is teaching his students potions. His nastiness is *reactive*; that is, he doesn't, except for that first day in SS, take the initiative. He *reacts* to things the students say and do that irritate him . He is easily irritated; he hates the world, and it doesn't take much to set him off, but he does need to be set off." BAW: And, whatever else you may say about Snape, he IS a good teacher; those of his Potions who are not totally lacking in aptitude--and there are some students whom even the best teachers can't help-- do pass their Potions OWLS. If you are in Snape's class, you probably won't LIKE it, you might even HATE it, but you will LEARN. And that's the main thing, isn't it? Teaching isn't a popularity contest. Lupinlore: "In all of this I think JKR is really a certain kind of conservative. If you want to put it in religious terms, she is the kind of conservative who thinks that original sin and its crippling effects are obvious and omnipresent and become magnified as levels of authority and sizes of organization increase." She's a Presbyterian, remember. Original sin, predestination, the Westminister Catechism, etc. BAW From ornawn at 013.net Mon Jan 2 19:22:22 2006 From: ornawn at 013.net (ornadv) Date: Mon, 02 Jan 2006 19:22:22 -0000 Subject: "Stand aside, girl" and the End Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 145743 >Jen: >So if he devalued anything love-related, WHY offer to let Lily save >herself? What makes more sense to me is this possibility -- that >Voldy knew about Lily's work studying DEATH, which most definitely >*was* on his radar screen. For this reason, perhaps, he was a >little more concerned about her, a little more worried about what >she might be capable of? Heck, maybe his plan was even to turn back >to her after he'd eliminated Harry and see if he couldn't extract >information from her about what she'd learned? He might have >thought of her both as dangerous AND as potentially useful in his >quest to avoid death and achieve immortality. Orna: I find it difficult to understand ? if Voldemort felt some fear about Lily ? he would kill her. If he wanted to use her, I think he would spare her ? but I'm not sure this way "Stand aside, silly girl" is so dismissive, that I can't connect it with some great interest in her. I don't expect him to be cortous or respectful, but I would expect him to stun her, tie her, or somehow do something to ensure her availability for him. This is such a western-movie slang, that I come back to the theory, that he was willing to spare her for being "a girl" for someone. That would also explain why he decided to kill her when she didn't step aside ? she wasn't important for him . I don't like this theory, but there it is. Perhaps he did want to use her - for her potions-brewing, for her supposed Death-information, or to interrogate her about what is hidden in the locked room . For all we know, Voldemort might not know that it's love which is locked in there ? he might just know that it's secret and locked ? enough reason to interrogate her). Since he doesn't imagine she will sacrifice herself or endanger herself for Harry's sake, he mught htrink that offering her the opportunity to step aside, would be enough. OK, agree. Actually ? what's the meaning of locking love in a room? I find this picture quite intriguing. What's the meaning of locking it in a room, what are the dangers of it? Orna From bboyminn at yahoo.com Mon Jan 2 20:05:01 2006 From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Mon, 02 Jan 2006 20:05:01 -0000 Subject: The Dursleys In-Reply-To: <43B96FE3.1000209@sprynet.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 145744 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Bart Lidofsky wrote: > > Steve wrote: > > bboyminn: > > According to Ron, Ron and Hermione are going to be with Harry > > at the Dursley's house. Please, you must see the comic > > come-uppance potential in that? > > Bart: > Consider the fact that part of the entire series is based on the > Wizarding Community's rather unusual conclusion not to take over > the Muggle world, and a group within who disagree with this. For > Harry & crew to take magical revenge on the Dursleys would be to > become followers of Lord Voldemort. > > The Dursleys are so miserable anyway that, frankly, the best > revenge would be to leave them alone. > > Bart > bboyminn: I'm not necessarly proposing 'magical revenge', what I am proposing is karmic come-uppence. As I said, Ron and Hermione will certainly understand that they are imposing and forcing their presence on the Dursley who clear would not desire their presence in their house, and because of this, they will try to be cooperative, undemanding, and unobtrusive house guests. But that only goes just so far, when the Dursleys make the transition from indifference and somewhat impolite to very impolite bordering on insulting and perhaps drifting into the realm of abusiveness, then I think Ron and Hermione will draw the line. I don't think it will be necessary for Ron and Hermione to physically or magically assault the Dursley unless they are actively engage in physically assaulting someone else. But, I have no doubt that Ron and Hermione will verbally put the Dursley in their place, much as Dumbledore did, when the Dursleys level of incivility reaches an intolerable level. Harry has grown use to the Dursleys level of incivility, and he mostly ignores them and stays out of the way. Ron and Hermione on the other hand are used to being treated like intelligent human beings, and they will only tolerate just so much of the Dursleys ill behavior before they reach their limit. So, in conclusion, while some magic may (or may not) be involved, I don't think Ron or Hermione will extract anything that we would likely call 'revenge', but I do think they will take the Dursleys to task and demand the level of civility that should be afforded to even a stranger. And, they will certainly draw the line should the Dursley start thinking they can treat them the way they treat Harry. It's not about extracting 'vengence', it's about being treated with the basic minimum level of respect do to anyone. Oh yes, by the way, I agree the Dursleys are their own worse punishment. Steve/bboyminn From lealess at yahoo.com Mon Jan 2 20:21:44 2006 From: lealess at yahoo.com (lealess) Date: Mon, 02 Jan 2006 20:21:44 -0000 Subject: The Dursleys In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 145745 Putting aside the comeuppance aspects of this discussion, the odd thing to me is that the Dursleys are the adults in the house they own, and Harry is the child and, more-or-less, a guest. The Dursleys have apparently agreed to house Harry at Privet Drive. Have the Dursleys invited Ron and Hermione to stay with them? Isn't that what adults get to decide, not children? I know children can ask if their friends can stay over, but moving in to live somewhere for who knows how long ... how can Harry, Ron or Hermione decide that without the Dursleys' express invitation and acceptance? Did I miss something (possible -- I don't have the book with me now). Or is this just another example of the magical world running over the Muggle world for its own purposes (*if* Ron and Hermione stay at Privet Drive)? lealess From rdoliver30 at yahoo.com Mon Jan 2 20:37:43 2006 From: rdoliver30 at yahoo.com (lupinlore) Date: Mon, 02 Jan 2006 20:37:43 -0000 Subject: Love and Vengeance (WAS: The Dursleys and Being Nice and Civil) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 145746 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "cubfanbudwoman" wrote: What is *JKR's* inclination > here? What is *her* view of Good, Right, Fair and Just? I'm > inclined to agree with Debbie that it's likely to revolve around > mercy and a renunciation of vengeance. I totally *understand* why > some would not find that "fair" nor satisfying, but since it's > rather in alignment with my own view of things (and with DD's as > well, I believe), then I know I'm in pretty good shape if something > of this sort occurred. Chuckle. I'm not at all sure DD is a person who I would take as a model of effective decision making. But be that as it may, I think one problem isn't so much the issue of justice and satisfaction (although those certainly are extremely important issues which other threads are exploring) as the -- *sigh* how to put it? -- sheer and overwhelming SERMONIZING that would constitute. If we end up with something as, well, extreme as this, I would have to say that for someone who has a horror of preaching JKR has shown a rather insipid inclination to engage in it. Now, I have to admit that I think JKR's claim to hate sermonizing and to have a horror of preaching at her readers is a little -- *double sigh* once again how to put it? -- disingenuous. I sometimes get the impression that she has some very detailed sermons on certain subjects she would just love to preach, given the right pulpit and the opportunity to protest at every step to the lectern just how much she hates preaching and doesn't want to do this. She reminds me a little of a diva who gets dragged on stage and says "Oh, I just couldn't. You know I hate to sing in public! Well, okay, if you could just give me the key of B-flat? I really have not talent for this, you know. I don't want -- I said B-flat, pianist. You are all just going to make me die of embarassment! I really don't want -- I SAID KEY OF B-FLAT!" I have to admit that I have VERY little patience with people like that. And my response to such an ending would be: "Okay, you said you have a horror of preaching and you've just given me a flat out sermon. It isn't a bad sermon, as such things go, but it is out-and- out preaching, the very thing you said you weren't going to do. In other words you lied to me and, in effect, sold me your books under false pretences. And I don't appreciate being lied to. No, I don't appreciate it at all." Lupinlore From ornawn at 013.net Mon Jan 2 20:58:28 2006 From: ornawn at 013.net (ornadv) Date: Mon, 02 Jan 2006 20:58:28 -0000 Subject: The Dursleys Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 145747 >lealess >I know children can ask if their friends >can stay over, but moving in to live somewhere for who knows how >long ... how can Harry, Ron or Hermione decide that without the >Dursleys' express invitation and acceptance? Did I miss something >(possible -- I don't have the book with me now). )? Orna: You are right and perhaps not: "We'll be there, Harry" said Ron "What?" "At your aunt and uncle's house" said Ron. "And then we'll go with you wherever you're going." So they are not exactly invited . OTOH we don't know for how long they plan to stay ? after all they have to visit their own home, as well. >lealess >Or is this just >another example of the magical world running over the Muggle world >for its own purposes (*if* Ron and Hermione stay at Privet Drive)? Orna: Maybe, but perhaps it's just another example for teenagers taking liberties . Actually I can't imagine Hermione just appearing (or apparating) on Dursleys front door, informing them she came to stay. I can imagine Harry informing the Dursleys, those two friends of his are coming , and somehow getting them to agree, grudgingly. Would that count as an invitation/acceptance? Orna From lealess at yahoo.com Mon Jan 2 21:19:23 2006 From: lealess at yahoo.com (lealess) Date: Mon, 02 Jan 2006 21:19:23 -0000 Subject: The Dursleys In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 145748 > Orna: > Maybe, but perhaps it's just another example for teenagers taking > liberties . > Actually I can't imagine Hermione just appearing (or apparating) on > Dursleys front door, informing them she came to stay. > I can imagine Harry informing the Dursleys, those two friends of > his are coming, and somehow getting them to agree, grudgingly. > Would that count as an invitation/acceptance? > The Dursleys will have to assume Harry's friends are wizards, and I can't see them willingly inviting wizards into their home. And then, if Ron and Hermione go all medieval on them ... well, lovely guests. But I could see this as the first confrontation of the book, actually. I can also see Hermione as the one who *does* apparate on their doorstep. Her own Muggle parents seem to go along with whatever she wants, and she can be very headstrong and sure of her actions. I believe she has lost touch with the Muggle world. On the other hand, I can see Ron and Hermione staying at Mrs. Figgs' house, if she is still there. It's in the neighborhood. lealess From horridporrid03 at yahoo.com Mon Jan 2 21:23:13 2006 From: horridporrid03 at yahoo.com (horridporrid03) Date: Mon, 02 Jan 2006 21:23:13 -0000 Subject: Real child abuse In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 145749 > >>Alla: > Huh? You are not SUPPOSED to take ANY of my opinions seriously, if > you don't want to, Betsy. Just as I don't have to take any of your > opinions seriously , if I don't want to. > NO, I am not saying that torturing the child is Okay, but I am > saying that making Draco bounce a few times is OK within the > narrative? Why? Because of whom he is. > Betsy Hp: I'm really uncomfortable with that sort of philosophy. Rather than using rules fairly applied to everybody, some rules are made for one sort of person and other rules are made for another sort. So, Draco deserves to be physically tortured because of who he is. But Neville should never be challanged because of who he is. Hagrid is allowed to physically endanger his students. Snape is not allowed to emotionally endanger his. The Death Eaters would agree with this sort of philosophy, of course. They feel quite comfortable with deciding which people are worthy of the lighter set of rules and which people need to suffer the rough justice they so easily give out. But if you're trying to show that those who think Snape is a child abuser are reasonable, Alla, taking a page out of the Death Eater philosophy book is a strange way of doing it. At least IMO. Yes, it's very tempting to assume that all those we love are right, and all those we dislike are wrong. Draco follows that system throughout the series, though hopefully he's beginning to question it now. Harry has followed that system as well, unfortunately. Though I think we do get glimpses of him realizing that not everyone he likes is good (Fake!Moody) and not everyone he dislikes is bad (Cedric Diggory). Does JKR expect us to think as Draco has done? Does she expect us to decide that whipping the twins is bad but whipping Draco is right? Or is she, perhaps, trying to point out a better, though by no means easy, path? Betsy Hp From midnightowl6 at hotmail.com Mon Jan 2 21:29:49 2006 From: midnightowl6 at hotmail.com (P J) Date: Mon, 02 Jan 2006 16:29:49 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: "Stand aside, girl" and the End In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 145750 Alla: Come to think of it, how do you think Voldemort came to know AT ALL about what happened as result of Lily sacrifice and whatever magic Dumbledore involved to protect Harry? It is not like Dumbledore gave him a detailed report, right? :-) I think I am missing something obvious here again. Sorry, I think I started rambling. PJ: Well, since Peter was the first to find Voldermort after escaping the Shrieking Shack, I believe he was able to give LV much more than even Bertha Jorgenson on a wide range of things that had happened since GH. He'd have been present for family discussions and possibly even Order meetings! Who watches what they say in front of their pets? Oddly enough though, none of the adults in the WW so much as mention this potential disaster. PJ From kchuplis at alltel.net Mon Jan 2 21:35:23 2006 From: kchuplis at alltel.net (kchuplis) Date: Mon, 02 Jan 2006 21:35:23 -0000 Subject: Love and Vengeance (WAS: The Dursleys and Being Nice and Civil) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 145751 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "lupinlore" wrote: > > Chuckle. I'm not at all sure DD is a person who I would take as a > model of effective decision making. But be that as it may, I think > one problem isn't so much the issue of justice and satisfaction > (although those certainly are extremely important issues which other > threads are exploring) as the -- *sigh* how to put it? -- sheer and > overwhelming SERMONIZING that would constitute. If we end up with > something as, well, extreme as this, I would have to say that for > someone who has a horror of preaching JKR has shown a rather insipid > inclination to engage in it. How would this constitute sermonizing? I've heard this claim before, but in general I find it to be more a case of "that's not how I want it to be". To be quite honest, I don't know how anyone could get to book 7 and not be able to tell this is a basic hero/coming of age story and it examines a lot of lifes choices and right and wrong and well, yes, a parade of morality skits lined up end on end. What JKR does is present it in a fantastically entertaining way and with the biggest underdog ever. It's not as though the basic throughline is completely original. But the way she presents it is rife with imaginative detail and sharp caracature. How can one read DD telling Harry that his mother's love gave him protection and not think this isn't leading somewhere along these lines? Or in CoS the show of loyalty that brings Fawkes and the sword? How can you read "the time may come to choose between what is easy and what is right" and not think we might not be heading toward a bit of moralizing? And I really don't see how one could get through OoTP and not see a host of social and moral criticism of people not looking at truth when it hits them in the face because it is more comfortable. To be honest, *I'll* feel cheated if it ends up a Revenge Tragedy where half the characters are killed and maybe even the evil guy, but all those little tidbits that lead to this point were useless platitudes because we don't want to appear to be preaching. I mean, where is the point in that? kchuplis From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Mon Jan 2 21:42:59 2006 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Mon, 02 Jan 2006 21:42:59 -0000 Subject: Twins and Dudley In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 145752 Alla wrote: > > As to Dudley though - it is clear to me that it is JKR playing > retribution on Dudley for all those years of "Harry's hunting", so > no matter how many practical jokes twins play on Dudley, I am > cheering them on and saying "More, please". Carol responds: But the lengthening and swelling of Dudley's tongue was not some funny little prank like turning Neville (momentarily) into a canary when Neville ate a canary cream. Now if *that* had happened to Dudley, I'd have laughed. But choking on one's tongue, asphyxiating, is a horrible way to die, and I'm sure that Dudley thought he was dying (not to mention that his mother was pulling on his tongue, not realizing what it was, in her misguided attempt to save him). Dudley was choking and suffocating, and he was in pain from having his tongue pulled. Also, both he and his parents were helpless against this terrifying magic. Yet the Twins thought it was funny. Whatever Dudley had done, he didn't deserve to suffer *that* horribly. And it was none of the Twins' business. He'd done nothing to *them,* and their behavior could have made matters worse for Harry. So I'm with Magpie: This incident is Muggle-baiting and IMO, there's nothing funny about it. Carol, who thinks this incident may well be the memory that came back to Dudley when the Dementor tried to suck out his soul (and if *that's* not sufficient comeuppance for Dudley, I don't know what is) From sherriola at earthlink.net Mon Jan 2 21:56:46 2006 From: sherriola at earthlink.net (Sherry Gomes) Date: Mon, 2 Jan 2006 13:56:46 -0800 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: The Dursleys In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <009301c60fe7$6daa7ef0$0400a8c0@pensive> No: HPFGUIDX 145753 The Dursleys will have to assume Harry's friends are wizards, and I can't see them willingly inviting wizards into their home. And then, if Ron and Hermione go all medieval on them ... well, lovely guests. But I could see this as the first confrontation of the book, actually. lealess Sherry now: Frankly, i am looking forward with glee to the idea of Ron and Hermione joining Harry at the Dursleys. We know that they starved and abused Harry. We know they locked him in his room and barred the windows and starved him. We know they let their miserable son beat him up on a regular basis. We also know from chapter three of HBP, that Vernon, at least, must have been free with his hands, because Harry thinks that long experience has taught him to stay out of reach of Vernon's arm. I'm speaking of hitting, shaking, shoving ... yes, ABUSE! So, after all Harry's years with that to live with, I can't wait to see how the simple presence of two of age magical folks will disturb them. sorry, it might not be a nice attitude, but in my opinion, they deserve no pity or consideration. i am confident that Harry's friends will try to stay out of their way and not disrupt them too much, but I am also confident that they will stand up for Harry and their support will be wonderful for him. and it's about time! Sherry From kchuplis at alltel.net Mon Jan 2 22:00:53 2006 From: kchuplis at alltel.net (kchuplis) Date: Mon, 02 Jan 2006 22:00:53 -0000 Subject: Twins and Dudley In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 145754 > Carol responds: > But the lengthening and swelling of Dudley's tongue was not some funny > little prank like turning Neville (momentarily) into a canary when > Neville ate a canary cream. Now if *that* had happened to Dudley, I'd > have laughed. > > But choking on one's tongue, asphyxiating, is a horrible way to die, > and I'm sure that Dudley thought he was dying (not to mention that his > mother was pulling on his tongue, not realizing what it was, in her > misguided attempt to save him). Now, you see, when I read it, it is Petunia's useless interfering which always seemed the more dangerous to me. When Arthur attempts to get them to let him fix it GoF pg. 49 (astericks mine) "But far from being reassured, the Dursley's became more panic stricken; Aunt Petunia was sobbing hysterically, tugging Duddley's tongue as though determined to rip it out; Dudley *appeared* to be suffocating under the combined pressure of his mother and his tongue;" He *appeared* to be suffocating. I'm still not convinced by any means that he WAS suffocating and Petunia was making matters worse (because just as wizards don't seem to listen to muggles, the muggles aren't listening to the wizard's either; particularly the Dursley's). I'm never sure why people think he is dying. It's a very farcical scene and, I think, intended only as such. kchuplis From stormydog2000 at yahoo.com Mon Jan 2 22:28:28 2006 From: stormydog2000 at yahoo.com (Dan S) Date: Mon, 2 Jan 2006 14:28:28 -0800 (PST) Subject: Harry as a Horcrux In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20060102222828.26527.qmail@web51413.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 145755 > Antosha: > I'm ambivalent about the Harry-as-Horcrux theories. > It seems likely to me that Harry's vanquishing of > Voldy will in fact center around an act of self- > sacrifice on his part, but the Horcrux theory... > :shrugs: I think that after you murder someone, you then use the spell to make a horcrux... this did not happen with Harry, the murder failed! He (Harry) just had powers tranferred from LV to him. Another interesting thought, what if Harry must try to save both Ron and Hermione but only 1 can survive...hate this thought!!! "stormydog2000" From belviso at attglobal.net Mon Jan 2 22:01:26 2006 From: belviso at attglobal.net (Magpie) Date: Mon, 2 Jan 2006 17:01:26 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Real child abuse/ JKR intentions/ Snape again/Draco References: Message-ID: <015901c60fe8$14c8efa0$c378400c@Spot> No: HPFGUIDX 145756 >> Betsy Hp: >> Now how on earth am I supposed to take your opinions about child >> abuse seriously when you say torturing a child is okay? That *is* >> what you're saying, yes? Dropping a transfigured Draco onto a > stone >> floor from such a height he actually bounces is fine and dandy. >> Catching Harry in the middle of a wrong doing and calling him on > it >> is abuse. I'm sorry, but your logic completely escapes me. > > Alla: > > Huh? You are not SUPPOSED to take ANY of my opinions seriously, if > you don't want to, Betsy. Just as I don't have to take any of your > opinions seriously , if I don't want to. Magpie: I'm a little puzzled by this reaction as well. We take peoples' views seriously as a default because they make a case for themselves, not because we decide at random to take them seriously or not. How could we have a conversation otherwise? Your views here do throw all your previous words about child abuse into a different light. Obviously child abuse (fictional child abuse) isn't the real issue if this scene is so different from Snape being sarcastic. Alla: > > NO, I am not saying that torturing the child is Okay, but I am > saying that making Draco bounce a few times is OK within the > narrative? Why? Because of whom he is. You know, I am reading PoA > right now and it made me realize once again how much I hate Draco > and how much IMO he deserves EVERYTHING he gets and more. Magpie: Sounds a lot like the way Snape probably feels whenever he deals with Harry. Every time Harry does something new Snape probably realizes again how much he hates Harry and how much IHO he deserves EVERYTHING he gets (from him) and more. Same with Neville. So what's the problem with what he does to them? In both cases someone making one feel angry deserves to be hurt and must be guilty of whatever there is to be guilty of. If someone gives one pleasure, like Moody here, he must really have good intentions like trying to be a good friend to Harry and Neville. The only consistency has to do with the same group of people being favored and everyone else assuming they could never be on the receiving end of rough justice because they're "deserving" of better treatment, unaware that at any second they could be the one not good enough to avoid abuse. If it's just a case of describing our reactions to our scenes that's a different matter: I like Neville, I identify with him in his scenes with Snape, so I get angry on his behalf when Snape yells at him. Or: I hate Draco. I want to hit him in his scenes, so I like seeing someone else do it. But I think the ethical considerations of the two are supposed to be more challenging. The ferret scene *is* a clue to Moody's real identity--Fake!Moody rarely lies, he just relies on his Polyjuiced face to make people interpret his words and actions in a positive light. The ferret scene uses hatred of Draco to trick and distract. Crouch *isn't* two different guys, the nice teacher and the DE. He's always the Death Eater. He just knows how to sucker people. -m From rdoliver30 at yahoo.com Mon Jan 2 23:04:27 2006 From: rdoliver30 at yahoo.com (lupinlore) Date: Mon, 02 Jan 2006 23:04:27 -0000 Subject: Love and Vengeance (WAS: The Dursleys and Being Nice and Civil) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 145757 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "kchuplis" wrote: > To be honest, *I'll* feel cheated > if it ends up a Revenge Tragedy where half the characters are killed and maybe even > the evil guy, but all those little tidbits that lead to this point were useless platitudes > because we don't want to appear to be preaching. I mean, where is the point in that? Well, I suppose the point would be, NOT PREACHING. I don't buy books to be preached at or sermonized to, but to read stories about characters I'm interested in doing things I can believe . That is why I think DDM!Snape would be incredibly poor writing -- it's simply, totally, mind-numbingly unbelievable. Grey!Snape, on the other hand, or LID!Snape, is believable, and would allow for getting across the same moral messages is DDM!Snape, but without the insipid sermonizing DDM!Snape might well entail. There is absolutely nothing wrong with getting across moral messages, but there are ways of getting the moral point across without preaching. JKR herself has acknowledged this distinction when she said she wanted to write moral books, not books with a moral. But the way to do that is NOT to have such an extreme ending that people blink, shake their heads, blink again, and say "Oh, you've got to be #@!@#% kidding me!" Tolkien very definitely had moral messages to get across. But he did it in ways that maintained believability. That is he got across the point of how forgiveness was important in the case of Gollum. But he did not have Saint Frodo saying "Oh, love compels me to end the cycle of mutual recrimination and release you from vengeance!" He got across the point of Higher Justice when Frodo spared Saruman. But Frodo acted not out of "foregiveness" or "love," but in a very real way as a form of retribution and an acknowledgement that the scales of justice were so heavily weighted against this fallen angel that there was little a hobbit could do to make things any worse. Thus, if in the end JKR has Harry realize that sparing Snape is, in effect, simply stepping aside and letting Higher Justice/Karma/whatever take its inevitable course -- that I could easily believe as being consistent with the needs of the story, Harry's character and his feelings for Snape, and getting across a certain moral message without sermonizing. If she has him say, in effect, "Go forth, oh noble Slytherin, and no that I forgive the from the depths of love in my heart even as my mother didst take mercy on the long ago," I will doubtless give myself I hernia laughing in derision. Similarly, if Harry destroys Voldemort by unthinkingly stepping forward to protect Wormtail with his own body, thus proving the power of self-sacrificial love while validating his decision to spare Wormtail in PoA, I will say "Extremely well done!" The action is perfectly in keeping with Harry's character and established automatic reactions, gets across the moral messages of justice and self- sacrificial love, and isn't preaching. If, on the other hand, he says "I refuse to raise my wand against you, O Voldemort, for despite that you have tormented me I refuse to sink to thy contrivance," I honestly think I'll have to be rushed to the hospital for treatment of life-threatening nausea. In other words, the difference is that moral messages are gotten across by characters acting in established and believable ways from motivations that are understandable and believable -- and thus which contain, inevitably, elements that are not entirely noble or unselfish -- which can, in fact, be downright unkind at times. I mean, who can read the end of LoTR and not feel that Frodo gets a rather large amount of satisfaction over, in effect, condescending to Saruman and telling him to go and live out his life as a beggar somewhere else? Who thinks that Frodo, or anyone else, really mourns Gollums death as opposed to thinking that Bilbo's mercy was effectual in the end, but it's really best for everybody that the little sneak went into the magma? And it is well to remember that in PoA, in taking the action the Dumbledore, for one, praised him for highly, Harry was not acting in an entirely noble or unselfish manner. Harry had no intention whatsoever of sparing Wormtail from punishment, but rather fully intended to hand Wormtail over to the Dementors while he went to live with Sirius. In that, JKR was moral, but not preaching. Preaching, on the other hand, involves sitting people up to do impossibly noble, unbelievably difficult, incredibly unselfish, and completely, unquestionably, inhumanly RIGHT things with the not-far- under-the-surface-message "If you don't act/think/believe like this you are a naughty person." Uh-huh. Pass me the anti-nausea prescription, please. Lupinlore From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Mon Jan 2 23:20:59 2006 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Mon, 02 Jan 2006 23:20:59 -0000 Subject: Real child abuse/ JKR intentions/ Snape again/Draco In-Reply-To: <015901c60fe8$14c8efa0$c378400c@Spot> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 145758 > Magpie: Your views here do throw all your previous words > about child abuse into a different light. Obviously child abuse (fictional > child abuse) isn't the real issue if this scene is so different from Snape > being sarcastic. Alla: It is not different per se, to me it is different because it is Draco. If the scene was with Fake!Moody bouncing someone whom we just had no clue about, not just someone I like, I would feel totally different. I think the scene is supposed to be taken as humorous, because it is Draco, that is all. > Alla: > > > > NO, I am not saying that torturing the child is Okay, but I am > > saying that making Draco bounce a few times is OK within the > > narrative? Why? Because of whom he is. You know, I am reading PoA > > right now and it made me realize once again how much I hate Draco > > and how much IMO he deserves EVERYTHING he gets and more. > > Magpie: > If it's just a case of describing our reactions to our scenes that's a > different matter: I like Neville, I identify with him in his scenes with > Snape, so I get angry on his behalf when Snape yells at him. Or: I hate > Draco. I want to hit him in his scenes, so I like seeing someone else do it. > But I think the ethical considerations of the two are supposed to be more > challenging. The ferret scene *is* a clue to Moody's real > identity--Fake!Moody rarely lies, he just relies on his Polyjuiced face to > make people interpret his words and actions in a positive light. The ferret > scene uses hatred of Draco to trick and distract. Crouch *isn't* two > different guys, the nice teacher and the DE. He's always the Death Eater. > He just knows how to sucker people. Alla: Oh, of course it is partially a case of our reactions ot the scenes. As I said I hate Draco and I am glad to see him suffer, BUT IMO it is also a case of different read of JKR's philosophy. As I said, I don't believe that JKR is the type of writer, who lets bad guys go unpunished. To me, objectively ( as I read it of course, I don't pretend to be a final authority on it :-)) Neville is a person of MUCH better character than Draco, that is why I sympathise with Neville and laugh when Draco gets bounced. What is most important though is I believe that JKR feels the same way. I think that by that time Draco did enough bad things to get something back, you know. Even in that scene, Draco is PUNISHED, Fake!Moody does not just attack him out of nowhere, he punishes him for attacking Harry. ANY teacher would have punished him, IMO, just using different methods. BUT if you were to show me say Snape threatening Neville to poison Trevor and fake!Moody bouncing Draco off with the names of the characters crossed out, I would absolutely called it child abuse in both scenes, you know? Since we do know who gets punished, I won't cry foul for poor Draco. Sorry! JMO of course, Alla From willsonkmom at msn.com Mon Jan 2 23:37:20 2006 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Mon, 02 Jan 2006 23:37:20 -0000 Subject: Real child abuse/ JKR intentions/ Snape again/Draco In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 145759 Alla wrote: > Since we do know who gets punished, I won't cry foul for poor Draco. > Sorry! > Potioncat: So, it isn't abuse if the child mishaved? No matter how severe the action is? OK, OK, I laughed too. But it is a slippery slope. It gets back to the fact that this is fiction and it's OK to feel good about the bad guy getting it. In real life, the bad good deserves the same treatment as the good guy. I don't think the real Mad-Eye would have bounced Draco. The real Fred might have.... From bboyminn at yahoo.com Mon Jan 2 23:39:34 2006 From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Mon, 02 Jan 2006 23:39:34 -0000 Subject: The Dursleys In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 145760 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "lealess" wrote: > > ... Have the Dursleys invited Ron and Hermione to stay with them? > Isn't that what adults get to decide, not children? I know > children can ask if their friends can stay over, but moving in to > live somewhere for who knows how long ... how can Harry, Ron or > Hermione decide that without the Dursleys' express invitation and > acceptance? Did I miss something ...? ...edited... > > lealess > bboyminn: What you are missing is that these are not typical teenagers intent on eating popcorn and chips (crips), and swilling down countless sodas while playing video games and watching TV. This is WAR! Ron and Hermione are there for Harry's protection and safety. That means they also provide protection and safety for the Dursleys; at least protection against outside attack. Your right, it is very impolite for Ron and Hermione to invite themselves. But the stakes are very high here. The fate of both the muggle and magic world is at stake. And while it might be rude, it is also necessary. The Dursleys will just have to get over it. Still you do bring up a good point. I don't see the Dursleys accepting this graciously. How will Harry convince them to let Ron and Hermione stay? Will he simply say, 'They are staying and that is IT!'? Will he try to reason and explain? I should be an interesting first few chapters. As an alternative, maybe the Dursleys will refuse, and Ron and Hermione will stay with Mrs. Figg and just visit Harry everyday. In a sense, hang out with Harry all day, but sleep every night at Figgs. Either way, it's going to be an interesting beginning for the next book. Just a thought. Steve/bboyminn From bboyminn at yahoo.com Tue Jan 3 00:05:13 2006 From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Tue, 03 Jan 2006 00:05:13 -0000 Subject: Twins and Dudley In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 145761 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "justcarol67" wrote: > Carol responds: > But the lengthening and swelling of Dudley's tongue was not > some funny little prank like turning Neville (momentarily) > into a canary when Neville ate a canary cream. Now if *that* > had happened to Dudley, I'd have laughed. > > But choking on one's tongue, asphyxiating, is a horrible way to > die, and I'm sure that Dudley thought he was dying .... Dudley > was choking and suffocating, and he was in pain from having his > tongue pulled. ...edited... > > Carol, ... bboyminn: Once again, I point out that the Ton-Tongue Toffee was a line of trick sweets that the Twins intended to sell to their friends and fellow students. Death by suffocation was NOT a very likely outcome. I have said before that all reason and logic says the the Ton Tongue Toffee was a self-limiting joke just like the Canary Creams. In time, Dudley's tongue would have probably returned to normal on its own, and other than a brief panic, he would have been no worse for the wear. Of course, I freely admit that Dudley doesn't know that. I think that if Dudley was suffocating, he was suffocation on panic and not on his tongue. True, inducing panic is still not a very nice thing to do, but have you ever seen a trick play on someone that WAS a nice thing to do? No one likes being the butt of a joke. No one likes to be humiliated by a joke. However, the people watching the joke usually think it's hysterically funny. In fact, the 'butt' of the joke would most likely also think it was funny, if it was being played on someone besides himself. But let's face it, cruel jokes are part of human culture. Have you ever seen 'Punked'. Some of those pranks are panic inducing and very unpleasant. But when the prank is reveal, the person who is the butt of the joke usually takes it gracefully. Let us remember also that Dudley is hardly an innocent victim here. He has no problem going out and vandalizing the play park, throwing stones at expensive car, and beating up helpless little kids while his friends hold them down. It's not like the Twins play a joke on Mother Teresa. (Although, I have no reason to think Mother Teresa didn't have a sense of humor.) So, assumptions that Dudley was dying are, I think, greatly exagerated. Just passing it along. Steve/bboyminn From a_svirn at yahoo.com Tue Jan 3 00:19:42 2006 From: a_svirn at yahoo.com (a_svirn) Date: Tue, 03 Jan 2006 00:19:42 -0000 Subject: The Dursleys In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 145762 > bboyminn: it is very impolite for Ron and Hermione to invite > themselves. But the stakes are very high here. The fate of both the > muggle and magic world is at stake. And while it might be rude, it is > also necessary. The Dursleys will just have to get over it. > > Still you do bring up a good point. I don't see the Dursleys accepting > this graciously. How will Harry convince them to let Ron and Hermione > stay? Will he simply say, 'They are staying and that is IT!'? Will he > try to reason and explain? I should be an interesting first few chapters. I don't see why you find it so interesting. In the end it makes no odds, doesn't it? The Dursleys will just have to get over whatever else wizards will dish out. a_svirn From a_svirn at yahoo.com Tue Jan 3 00:28:46 2006 From: a_svirn at yahoo.com (a_svirn) Date: Tue, 03 Jan 2006 00:28:46 -0000 Subject: Twins and Dudley In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 145763 > bboyminn: > I think that if Dudley was suffocating, he was suffocation on panic > and not on his tongue. True, inducing panic is still not a very nice > thing to do, but have you ever seen a trick play on someone that WAS a > nice thing to do? No one likes being the butt of a joke. No one likes > to be humiliated by a joke. However, the people watching the joke > usually think it's hysterically funny. In fact, the 'butt' of the joke > would most likely also think it was funny, if it was being played on > someone besides himself. > > But let's face it, cruel jokes are part of human culture. a_svirn: I think the very existence of this on-going debate proves you wrong, Steve. Some people obviously do not find humiliating pranks hysterically funny. As for human nature ? let's face it: cruelty is indeed a part of human nature and no joking. It's hardly an excuse for being cruel, though. From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Tue Jan 3 00:47:29 2006 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Tue, 03 Jan 2006 00:47:29 -0000 Subject: Love and Vengeance (WAS: The Dursleys and Being Nice and Civil) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 145764 SSSusan earlier: > > I think this is the extra step I had not included in my vision > > for the ending. IOW, it's not *just* sacrificial love ? or an > > act of sacrifice made out of love ? it's the REJECTION of > > vengeance, as well, which would make Harry's action so > > extraordinary. > > > > So how *could* purity of heart & a thirst for vengeance > > coincide? It's an excellent question and perhaps the CRUX of > > things for understanding JKR's worldview, no? Alla: > I don't know if they cannot be together though, love and vengeance, > I mean. > > I read Debbie's wonderful post and I am fully with her and with you > too, I guess that Harry will not kill Voldemort. He just won't. SSSusan: I think I should clarify. While I definitely cannot speak for Debbie, I am not at all certain that Harry will not kill Voldemort. What I don't think will happen is that he'll walk up and shout "Avada Kedavra!" with hate in his heart and murder Voldy. But I think it is entirely possible that *whatever* action Harry takes ? in my opinion some form of intended self-sacrifice ? will result in the vanquishment/destruction of Voldy and that that might, nay probably will, mean his death as well. The thing is, I don't think Harry will do it because he HATES Voldy but because he loves others, wants to protect others from the hatred which Voldy personifies. So the motivation would be a desire to end the pain and evil which Voldy brings, rather than a desire for vengeance or through some tremendous release of hatred. Does that make sense? And while I think this is possible ? that an action of Harry's will result in Voldy's death ? I think it's also possible that there will be some other form of destruction of Voldy that might come about WITHOUT Harry's actually killing him directly. Can't fathom what in the world it would be, but I wouldn't put it past Jo to come up with a means. Alla explained: > Therefore Lord Voldemort will get what is coming to him, even > though Harry may even feel some pity for the boy who was once Tom > Riddle or something like that. > > So, IMO we will get both things, mercy and sort vengeance form of > justice. SSSusan: I definitely agree that Voldy will get what is coming to him, but I'm not in agreement that it will come *out* of a desire for vengeance in Harry. THAT'S the point I was trying to make. IOW, I think Voldy will cease to be, Harry will have THE major role to play in that occurrence, but I do not believe that Harry will go into that final situation ? whatever it is ? with vengeance on his mind. He will, I think, go into it believing Voldy must be stopped. If there is a way to do that which will involve forgiveness of Voldy, I can see that happening; I can also see that not necessarily being a part of JKR's package. But what I don't think I can envision is a Harry who goes into it thinking "Voldy's going to get what he *deserves,* and *I'm* going to be the one to give it to him!" (aka, with vengeance as his motivation). Alla: > I have faith in JKR's writing abilities, I am sure she can pull off > even such scenario well ( even though it is indeed truly not my > favorable one), BUT if you believe that Snape needs to get what is > coming to him for many bad deeds he committed during his life time, > as I definitely do, I don't see that Harry's forgiveness and > Snape's punishment should be mutually exclusive. SSSusan: I absolutely still have faith in JKR's writing abilities, as well. Again, I guess the question here is whether it's "necessary" for Snape to get his punishment *from* Harry himself. That's what I was getting at with Voldy, too. Snape and Voldy *may* each "get theirs," but I'm not at all convinced that it will be HARRY who's making sure they get it, or at least that he'll make sure *because* he wants vengeance. So, no, it's not that Snape's and Voldy's punishment/getting what they deserve can't happen if Harry feels forgiveness or displays mercy -- or, as you say, that those are mutually exclusive happenings. What I do think is that any feeling of vengeance in Harry will NOT occur in the same moment as the forgiveness or mercy. IOW, I think he would have a change of heart about any vengeful desires. Thus, the comeuppance might come at a different time or even from a different source than Harry. What I can't picture is Harry saying, "I HATE you and I'm going to get you back for all that you've done!" and then saying, "Wait. I forgive you and grant you your life out of mercy." THOSE things, in the same moment, do indeed seem mutually exclusive. And, since I believe in Harry's purity of heart, I guess I believe that the tendency towards mercy will prevail over any thoughts of vengeance he might first have. Alla: > I am sure that Harry will not kill Snape... BUT I also think that > at some point in book 7, Snape WILL stand absolutely powerless at > Harry's mercy AND I think Snape will hate it very much. That would > be SUFFICIENT for me to see Snape powerless even for a brief > moment in time ( for all six years of Harry being powerless in > front of Snape) SSSusan: Right. This would be Harry experiencing mercy *not* at the same moment that he wants vengeance, correct? It's the desire for vengeance occurring at the same time as an act of mercy or forgiveness which seems totally incongruous to me. SSSusan earlier: > > What is *JKR's* inclination here? What is *her* view of Good, > > Right, Fair and Just? I'm inclined to agree with Debbie that > > it's likely to revolve around mercy and a renunciation of > > vengeance. Lupinlore wrote: > I think one problem isn't so much the issue of justice and > satisfaction (although those certainly are extremely important > issues which other threads are exploring) as the -- *sigh* how to > put it? ? sheer and overwhelming SERMONIZING that would > constitute. If we end up with something as, well, extreme as this, > I would have to say that for someone who has a horror of preaching > JKR has shown a rather insipid inclination to engage in it. [Lupinlore in same thread, different post:] > If, on the other hand, he says "I refuse to raise my wand against > you, O Voldemort, for despite that you have tormented me I refuse > to sink to thy contrivance," I honestly think I'll have to be > rushed to the hospital for treatment of life-threatening nausea. SSSusan: I think this goes back to what Alla said about faith in JKR's writing. She & I seem to have a good deal more faith in that than you do. For me, I see no reason to expect that an ending involving love or forgiveness or mercy would necessarily involve sermonizing or preaching. As you noted, JKR has managed to insert morality or moral messages without having her books be "morality tales." Why could the ending ? whether the one you want, the one I want, or something different than either entirely ? not be done by JKR *without* preaching and stilted, cheesy, insipid language (to borrow a few of your favorite words for your worries about JKR's writing ;- ))? Again, no matter WHAT ending ? whether Harry screaming out in rage as he AKs Voldy (which some would like to see but I would not) or Harry sacrificing himself in order to save those whom he loves and the WW at large (which is my preference) or something else entirely ? what have we seen from Jo to indicate that she's going to preach at us? Could she not pull off an elegantly simple solution to this mystery which leaves us all touched without causing us to snort in derision or roll our eyes? Perhaps I'm na?ve, but I still believe she'll do it, even if it's not the ending I'm expecting or hoping for. Siriusly Snapey Susan From anita_hillin at yahoo.com Tue Jan 3 01:07:02 2006 From: anita_hillin at yahoo.com (AnitaKH) Date: Mon, 2 Jan 2006 17:07:02 -0800 (PST) Subject: CHAPDISC: HBP7, The Slug Club Message-ID: <20060103010702.10570.qmail@web36814.mail.mud.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 145765 CHAPTER DISCUSSIONS: Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince, Chapter 7, The Slug Club With many thanks to Penapart Elf for slogging through my first draft (it was MUCH longer!) Synopsis: Harry spends the final week of school holiday pondering the significance of Malfoy?s actions in Knockturn Alley. He guesses that Draco may be a Death Eater, which Ron and Hermione greet with skepticism. The next day the Weasleys, Hermione and Harry head off to Platform 9 ? in Ministry cars and are greeted at the station by two bearded Aurors in Muggle clothing. Harry goes first through the barrier, accompanied silently by one of the Aurors. Once the others have joined them, Harry suggests they all find a seat on the train. Hermione reminds Harry somewhat apologetically that she and Ron have to sit in the Prefects? car and patrol the corridors. Before stepping onto the train, Harry takes the opportunity to inform Arthur Weasley of his suspicions about Draco Malfoy. Arthur is also skeptical that Draco would be admitted as a Death Eater. Harry remains firmly convinced that Draco is plotting something dangerous. Harry catches up with Ginny on the train, but she tells him that she has promised to look for Dean. Slightly annoyed, he turns to find himself surrounded by ?mesmerized girls.? He hears a voice and is relieved to greet Neville, followed closely by Luna. The three find seats on the train together. Neville marvels that the three of them are being noticed on the train, presuming that it?s due to the fact Harry is with them. Harry reminds him that all three were cited in the Daily Prophet?s report of the Ministry battle. Neville mentions that he was worried his grandmother would disapprove, but on the contrary she said he was at last beginning to live up to his parents, and she bought him a new wand. He remarks that it may have been the last one Ollivander ever sold, because he disappeared the next day. As Harry, Luna and Neville chat, several Fourth-year girls appear outside the compartment, and Romilda Vane barges in, asking Harry to join them in their compartment so he doesn?t have to sit with Neville and Luna. He coldly replies that he is sitting with friends. The girls leave, and when Luna points out that people expect Harry to have cooler friends than them, he defends them, saying they are cool, having fought with him at the Ministry of Magic. As Neville talks about his OWL results, Harry ruminates on the twist of fate that made him the Chosen One, rather than Neville. In the midst of his reverie, Neville notices and asks Harry if he?s all right. Luna presumes he?s been attacked by a Wrackspurt, an invisible creature that floats through one?s ear into one?s brain, making it all fuzzy. As Luna bats off imagined Wrackspurts, Harry and Neville exchange a look and hastily change the subject. After some time, Hermione and Ron enter the compartment. Ron mentions that Draco is not performing his Prefect duties, but is instead sitting in a compartment with several of his Slytherin cronies. Just as Harry is about to expound on his theory explaining Draco?s behavior, a Third-year girl arrives with an invitation for Harry and Neville to join Professor Slughorn in his compartment for lunch. Neville is mystified (and a little alarmed) by his invitation. Harry suspects the reason is his famous parents, but he doesn?t mention it to Neville. They arrive at Slughorn?s compartment to find they are joined by a number of other students, including Ginny. Harry is introduced to Blaise Zabini, Cormac McLaggen and Marcus Belby. As Slughorn chats with each student, Harry?s suspicions are confirmed: each has a famous or well-connected relative, except for Harry and Ginny. When Slughorn turns to Harry, he is obviously hunting for confirmation that Harry is, indeed, the Chosen One. Slughorn asks prying questions about the incident at the Ministry of Magic, but Ginny, Neville and Harry are not forthcoming. Giving up for the moment, Slughorn launches into a name-dropping reminiscence. Finally, Slughorn notices the time and dismisses them all. As they move back to their compartments, Harry asks Ginny how she ended up at the luncheon. She explains that she hexed Zacharias Smith after he irritated her by badgering her with questions about the Ministry of Magic incident. Watching Zabini return to his compartment, Harry realizes Blaise is sitting with Draco and decides to follow him into the compartment using the Invisibility Cloak and eavesdrop on the conversation with Malfoy and his gang. Harry manages to get in and position himself in the luggage rack, although not without revealing his trainers. However, he assures himself that the compartment was in too much disarray for anyone to notice. Blaise reports on the lunch with Slughorn, mentioning the attendees. We discover that Ginny is generally popular with Hogwarts boys, even passing Zabini?s standards. As they discuss Slughorn, Malfoy casually mentions that he might not even be at Hogwarts the following year. Draco hints that he may be on to ?bigger and better? things, and he allows the others to suggest he will be working for LV. When Zabini expresses his doubts that LV would be interested in an unqualified 16 year old, Malfoy says perhaps LV has a job for him that doesn?t require him to be qualified. Trying to assimilate what he has just heard, Harry fails to notice that Goyle is reaching up for his trunk until it is too late. Goyle hits Harry in the head, and he gasps in pain. This catches Malfoy?s attention, but he then resumes getting ready to leave, much to Harry?s relief. As they are all leaving, Draco tells Pansy to go ahead while he checks on something. Seemingly alone in the compartment, Malfoy draws the blinds. Harry watches, curious to see if Malfoy is about to reveal his broken object. Without warning, Harry is hit with petrificus totalus and plummets from the luggage rack. Malfoy gleefully tells Harry he suspected Harry was there when Goyle?s trunk hit him. He assures Harry he didn?t hear anything important, but still takes the opportunity to stomp in Harry?s face and cover him again with the cloak, thus making Harry both immobile and invisible. Questions: 1. This is the beginning of what will be a year-long obsession with Draco for Harry. In hindsight, what does this reveal about Harry?s powers of discernment? 2. The Aurors in the scene are men we have never seen before. Is this done to highlight the changes at the Ministry of Magic, or is there some more sinister reason? 3. Compare this train scene with the early train scene in OOP. How do his feelings toward Neville and Luna compare in the two scenes? What does this scene do for our understanding of the Harry in HBP? 4. In this chapter, Harry spends time with people of two very different rungs on the social ladder: the Slug Club -v- Neville and Luna (whose lack of popularity is touched upon several times in this chapter: Romilda's comments, DA being a source of Luna's only friends, Neville's own grandmother's wish for Harry as a grandson etc.). Discuss Harry's very different opinions of the two social circles. What about Draco's perception of where he is on the social ladder? (the attempt to impress that seemingly was trigger by being snubbed by Slughorn, his relationship with Pansy who seems determined to form some kind of attachment to him, etc.) 5. Neville mentions that his wand may have been the last Ollivander sold before he vanished. Do you think this is one of those throwaway lines that will be significant later? How? 6. What is the composition of Neville?s wand, and will it be important? 7. Luna comes up with yet another ? er ? quirky creature. What are the chances that Luna?s wacky creatures will be proven real? And if so, which ones? 8. As we learn about each student?s connections during Slughorn?s luncheon party, whose story, if any, do you suppose will prove to be important in book 7? 9. The luncheon scene with Slughorn highlights the personality traits that we glimpsed in ?Horace Slughorn.? Did this scene cement your opinion of Slughorn, did it change your first impression from the earlier chapter, or did your opinion undergo a transformation later, say, after seeing the full horcrux memory? 10. We see that Pansy and Draco seem to be a couple, based on this scene. Will this have any significance in the future? (oh, like, say, Pansy?s is Draco?s hideout or something ) 11. I find the end of this chapter difficult to read, wishing at an emotional level that Harry would use more caution. Harry?s impulsiveness has gotten him into scrapes before, and he once again takes a chance and loses. How do you think this tendency will play out? (Curiosity killed the cat or caution makes cowards of us all?) 12. Please add any questions/comments of your own for discussion Respectfully submitted by akh, who was reminded today why she only drives from Chicago to Wichita twice a year NOTE: For more information on HPfGU's chapter discussions, please see "HPfGU HBP Chapter Discussions" at http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/database --------------------------------- Yahoo! Photos Ring in the New Year with Photo Calendars. Add photos, events, holidays, whatever. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From miles at martinbraeutigam.de Tue Jan 3 01:08:55 2006 From: miles at martinbraeutigam.de (Miles) Date: Tue, 3 Jan 2006 02:08:55 +0100 Subject: Real child abuse/ JKR intentions/ Snape again/Draco References: Message-ID: <014b01c61002$45ae2ee0$14b2a8c0@rechnerchen> No: HPFGUIDX 145766 Alla wrote: > Since we do know who gets punished, I won't cry foul for poor Draco. > Sorry! Potioncat: > So, it isn't abuse if the child mishaved? No matter how severe the > action is? > > OK, OK, I laughed too. But it is a slippery slope. It gets back to the > fact that this is fiction and it's OK to feel good about the bad guy > getting it. In real life, the bad good deserves the same treatment as > the good guy. Miles: Maybe this is a lesson JKR teaches us? Seeing Draco punished that way is a YES-moment (it was for me and many other readers), but rereading it, knowing that the "Moody" is not the Auror we then thought he is, but a lunatic murderer, we really should read this scene very different. I agree with Magpie, that the moral of the scene PLUS the background information we get later is to show us a moral dilemma. Rules that protect people from maltreatment can only be effective, if they are used on all people regardless of their deeds. These rules protect Draco, Ron, Crabbe, Harry, and Goyle. So, abusing Draco this way is as inacceptable as abusing Harry by let him cut words into his own hand. The world is not divided into nice people and DEs, and, yes, human rights are not divided into rights of nasty teenaged sons of DEs and DA- and OotP-members. This is not only the moral in the Potterverse, we are struggling with this problem in our world as well. Miles From juli17 at aol.com Tue Jan 3 01:16:40 2006 From: juli17 at aol.com (juli17 at aol.com) Date: Mon, 2 Jan 2006 20:16:40 EST Subject: Real child abuse/ JKR intentions/ Snape again/Draco Message-ID: <60.648b570b.30eb2a78@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 145767 Alla wrote: NO, I am not saying that torturing the child is Okay, but I am saying that making Draco bounce a few times is OK within the narrative? Why? Because of whom he is. You know, I am reading PoA right now and it made me realize once again how much I hate Draco and how much IMO he deserves EVERYTHING he gets and more. In RL I would not advocate teacher using ANY physical punishments on the child like EVER. Julie now: But haven't you argued that JKR's Wizarding World is a reflection of the real world, and that is why you consider Snape's actions toward Harry and Neville abusive? If different standards in the WW, i.e. within the story narrative, aren't a mitigating factor there, then why is it okay for Draco to be abused within the narrative if it wouldn't be okay in RL? That aside, I think McGonagall's reaction is meant to be the appropriate WW reaction to Fake!Moody's act. "We do *not* transfigure our students!" (or whatever her exact words) quite directly translates to "That sort of abuse is *not* acceptable!" Or, "No matter how much a student provokes you, or how much he may deserve it, students are children, and we do not engage in CHILD ABUSE!" And, yes, as readers we may get a bit of enjoyment at seeing Draco getting his just desserts here. But we can still know it was wrong, and that Fake!Moody was abusing his position, just as we can know it's wrong of Snape to abuse his position with constant nasty comments to Harry and Neville. > Julie (earlier): > Of course, these labels are not all mutually exclusive, except > perhaps DDM and ESE. DDM can flow into Grey, which can flow into LID, > etc, etc. The most believable Snape will have shades of several > qualities, just as real humans do. (Which is why DDM!Snape to me is > most definitely not analogous to Good!Snape or Hero!Snape, though > some insist on pressing that narrow definition.) Alla: Oh, Julie do tell, maybe you will convert me to DD!M Snape :-), because to me DD!M Snape is definitely analogous to Good!Snape, unless you are thinking of Snape which Severely Siguine postulated about - the one who kills Dumbledore to save his own life, but because he thinks that his life will be of value to good guys and of course in that scenario Dumbledore does not ask Snape to do him in. Is there any other DD!M Snape who is not Good!Snape? Julie now: Of course there is. DDM!Snape means one thing, and one thing only. That Snape is on Dumbledore's side and is doing his bidding, thus he is working for the side of Good. That doesn't mean he is a Good person in the sense that Dumbledore or Harry or Hermoine are Good because they most frequently act based on their best instincts. Snape can still be deeply flawed (as if there's a doubt about that!), mean and bitter, too often given to acting from his worst instincts (when it comes to Harry especially), and yet in the end his actions still place him on the side of Good. Look at Good/Evil as a scale. *Every* human being commits acts of both. Dumbledore's scale is tipped very heavily on the Good side, Voldemort's is tipped very heavily on the Evil side. We aren't fully sure how Snape's is tipped, but it's certain there is a fair amount of weight on the Evil side, from his DE days and some of the choices he's made since. But if he's DDM, then in the end the weight on the Good side, based on his continuing and future acts of redemption, will outweigh the other side, and Snape will end up more Good than Evil, if in a modest sense. Thus is Snape, if never Good, at least good, enough so to redeem his soul. Which is where not a few humans end their lives. I.e., Snape can be Grey and DDM. And that is how I see him. Julie [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Tue Jan 3 01:35:22 2006 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Tue, 03 Jan 2006 01:35:22 -0000 Subject: Real child abuse/ Snape again In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 145768 Alla wrote: > > Alla: > > IMO, it is. Harry never trusted Snape because Snape made sure to > treat Harry as enemy. Harry had no clue who Snape was till Snape > showed him what "teacher" like him can do. Carol responds: Harry thought that Snape had caused his scar to burn and Percy has said that Snape "knows an awful lot about the Dark Arts," which would lead Harry to assume (correctly) an association between Snape and Slytherin even before he knows that Snape is the Slytherin's HoH. His odd dream in which Quirrell's turban acts the role of the Sorting Hat and places him in Slytherin also links Draco to Snape and Snape (with no cause whatever) to Voldemort--all this before Harry has taken a class with Snape. In part, the dream, like the scar incident, acts as a red herring to set Snape up as the apparent villain of the book, but it also shows, IMO, that Harry at least subconsciously distrusts Snape from the outset, before Snape has spoken a single word to Harry. The little question-and-answer session in the first Potions class, in which Snape demonstrates for whatever reason that "our new celebrity" doesn't know a bezoar from wolfbane, reinforces Harry's preconceptions about Snape. (No doubt it reinforces Snape's preconceptions about Harry as well.) At any rate, Snape is not treating Harry as an "enemy" in that class, only as a "dunderhead," a boy who knows nothing about the WW and clearly hasn't studied his textbooks very diligently. And, as I said earlier, Harry's distrust of him predates that class. He *does* have a clue who Snape is before that; he learns before the first class that Snape is the head of Slytherin House. And Slytherin, thanks to Draco and Hagrid, is equated in Harry's mind with evil before he even sits down to be Sorted ("Not Slytherin! Not Slytherin!"). Then Snape eyes him intently after he sits down at the Gryffindor table (a little long-distance Legilimency?) and, by post hoc ergo propter hoc reasoning, "causes" Harry's scar to burn. Harry decides at that point that Snape dislikes him. By the end of the first class, he "knows" that Snape hates him. (Snape has also called Neville an "idiot boy" for melting *Seamus's* cauldron, but paid him no special attention before that memorable moment. He certainly didn't *cause* Neville to melt the cauldron.) But Harry's distrust of Snape begins before that class, as shown by the dream. IMO, Harry's bias against Slytherin predisposes him to distrust Snape and to attach more importance to Snape's "unfairness" than it perhaps deserves. Snape's behavior reinforces the bias, just as Harry's behavior reinforces Snape's bias against him. Had McGonagall questioned him in the same way (minus the sarcasm) about Transfiguration (What is a Switching Spell, Potter?", he would merely have thought her unreasonable, not evil. He certainly would not have suspected her, a few chapters later, of trying to steal the Sorceror's Stone, even if he'd overheard her talking with Quirrell and questioning where his loyalties lie. But Snape = Slytherin and Slytherin = evil in Harry's mind, even at this early point. Carol, hoping that Snape's birthday shows up on JKR's website January 9 From sunnylove0 at aol.com Tue Jan 3 02:10:35 2006 From: sunnylove0 at aol.com (sunnylove0 at aol.com) Date: Mon, 2 Jan 2006 21:10:35 EST Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Real child abuse/ JKR intentions/ Snape again/Draco Message-ID: <141.542c5652.30eb371b@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 145769 In a message dated 1/2/2006 4:22:41 PM Mountain Standard Time, dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com writes: Even in that scene, Draco is PUNISHED, Fake!Moody does not just attack him out of nowhere, he punishes him for attacking Harry. No, no, no. If it was Real!Moody, I'd agree with you. But this is Fake!Moody, who hates "Death Eaters who Walked Free" more than anything. To me, he isn't truly, beyond his spoken excuse, punishing Draco for anything but being Lucius Malfoy's child. And that, for me, puts him right on the same level with Snape's treatment of Harry. (Who he's also looking forward to "a little chat with". Not that there's really any excuse for Draco's behavior, but as has been said before, moral behavior must be applied equally, to the bad as well as the good, or it isn't moral behavior. Real!Moody didn't kill. He never sank to the level of the Death Eaters. But it sure wasn't because they didn't deserve it. Amber Amber [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From katmac at katmac.cncdsl.com Tue Jan 3 02:16:23 2006 From: katmac at katmac.cncdsl.com (lagattalucianese) Date: Tue, 03 Jan 2006 02:16:23 -0000 Subject: Real child abuse/ Snape again In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 145770 > > Betsy Hp: > Now how on earth am I supposed to take your opinions about child > abuse seriously when you say torturing a child is okay? That *is* > what you're saying, yes? Dropping a transfigured Draco onto a stone > floor from such a hight he actually bounces is fine and dandy. > Catching Harry in the middle of a wrong doing and calling him on it > is abuse. I'm sorry, but your logic completely escapes me. > > I'd also like to think that the real Moody would beg to differ with > your view that he'd eagerly torture a child. > ... > La Gatta Lucianese: I don't think we're supposed to see this as "rough justice" at all, at least not after we finish the book. While it is gratifying to some degree to see Draco get a comeuppance, I think JKR gives her readers credit for having enough brains to realize what is really going on, once they have finished the book: This isn't Alastor Moody, this is Barty Crouch Jr., who hates Death Eaters who walked away, taking vengeance on the son of one of the most conspicuous of the Death Eaters who walked away. Professor McGonagall is right to be shocked and call him on it--even if his victim is snotty little Draco. From katmac at katmac.cncdsl.com Tue Jan 3 02:20:36 2006 From: katmac at katmac.cncdsl.com (lagattalucianese) Date: Tue, 03 Jan 2006 02:20:36 -0000 Subject: C!M Imperius/no more dueling In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 145771 > > I'm thinking that LV will try to kill someone (probably Harry), > but then the AK will rebound because of the Power of Love, > killing him instead. > > "Neuman" > La Gatta Lucianese: Or something will happen between Harry and Snape that will cancel out the hatred Harry feels for Snape and enable him/them to repel the AK. The amount of hate that Harry is toting around at this point might make it rather difficult for him to repel Voldemort, even with his mother's sacrifice. From amanda_haffery at hotmail.com Tue Jan 3 01:56:57 2006 From: amanda_haffery at hotmail.com (Amanda Haffery) Date: Tue, 03 Jan 2006 01:56:57 +0000 Subject: Real child abuse/ Snape again In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 145772 >>Carol responds: IMO, Harry's bias against Slytherin >predisposes him to distrust Snape and to attach more importance to >Snape's "unfairness" than it perhaps deserves. Snape's behavior >reinforces the bias, just as Harry's behavior reinforces Snape's bias >against him. Amanda: I feel that Snape has treated Harry horribly since the very beginning. He makes fun of him in class, in front of other people and all around just treats him like he's inferior. It may not be physical abuse but sometimes emotional abuse is just as awful. And Harry doesn't understand what he's done wrong to this man. This authority figure. All he understands is that he's hated and that he's being mistreated. I also feel that Neville has been treated the same way and it's wrong. No one should suffer through that. Amanda From juli17 at aol.com Tue Jan 3 02:30:26 2006 From: juli17 at aol.com (juli17ptf) Date: Tue, 03 Jan 2006 02:30:26 -0000 Subject: JKR's overriding theme (Re: Love and Vengeance) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 145773 > > Alla: > > I have faith in JKR's writing abilities, I am sure she can pull off > > even such scenario well ( even though it is indeed truly not my > > favorable one), BUT if you believe that Snape needs to get what is > > coming to him for many bad deeds he committed during his life time, > > as I definitely do, I don't see that Harry's forgiveness and > > Snape's punishment should be mutually exclusive. Julie: They don't have to be mutually exclusive. As long as *Harry* doesn't act against Snape out of vengeance (as he'd very much like to do as of the end of HBP), then Snape can receive all the punishment he deserves, which IMO could come as poetic or karmic justice. And that justice doesn't involve vengeance at all, but getting back from the Universe exactly what you put in. (Snape owing yet another Potter-- Harry--his life would be an example of poetic justice, given Snape's resentment of the debt to James is the impetus for much of his nastiness to Harry throughout the books.) I do realize I repeated Sssusan somewhat here, but I have more to add. I just saw "Munich" today at the theater, and it deals very much with some of the same themes in the HP books, namely vengeance, and exactly what it wreaks both in terms of society and individual human souls, which is essentially havoc. I am very much in agreement with Speilberg's view, and I expect JKR may be too. Vengeance destroys, from both inside and out. Nothing good comes of it except more vengeance. And, for the individual, it does little more than eat away at the soul, as in HP it has eaten away at Voldemort's soul, at Snape's soul, and will eat away at Harry's soul if he gives into its pull. And yes, putting it in those bald terms would be bad writing, but fortunately JKR has been much more subtle with that particular two-by- four than I am. She shows rather than tells. > SSSusan earlier: > > > What is *JKR's* inclination here? What is *her* view of Good, > > > Right, Fair and Just? I'm inclined to agree with Debbie that > > > it's likely to revolve around mercy and a renunciation of > > > vengeance. > Lupinlore wrote: > > I think one problem isn't so much the issue of justice and > > satisfaction (although those certainly are extremely important > > issues which other threads are exploring) as the -- *sigh* how to > > put it? ? sheer and overwhelming SERMONIZING that would > > constitute. If we end up with something as, well, extreme as this, > > I would have to say that for someone who has a horror of preaching > > JKR has shown a rather insipid inclination to engage in it. > Julie: It doesn't have to be sermonizing. Like anything, it can be shown in action much more effectively. And while "satisfaction" and "justice" are important themes to you, I don't see that they are important themes to JKR. Poetic justice does certainly pop up here and there, which certainly does deliver some satisfaction, but JKR hitting us over the head with lectures from Lily to Snape and such would be no less sermonizing than what you postulate above. And it's all secondary to the main theme of HP anyway. What I do see as the overriding theme of HP is self-sacrifice, in the name of love. Lily sacrificed her life to save Harry. Dumbledore sacrificed his life to save Draco, Harry, the rest of his Hogwarts students, and to ensure future of the WW. Snape(DDM) sacrificed his freedom, good name (such as it is), and probably his life by the end for those things also, though perhaps most of all for his love of Dumbledore. And Harry will most likely offer his life to Voldemort as sacrifice for his love of his friends and the safety of the WW. Basically, it's another riff on the age-old theme, Christian and otherwise, that love will save the world, not vengeance. Not an-eye- for-an-eye justice, but turn-the-other-cheek sacrificial love. What the world needs now is...well, you know. I have faith that JKR is more than capable of pulling it off with mastery and aplomb. And no matter how schmaltzy it seems, it's simply the truth. In the meantime, pass me a Coke ;-) Julie From willsonkmom at msn.com Tue Jan 3 03:13:40 2006 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Tue, 03 Jan 2006 03:13:40 -0000 Subject: CHAPDISC: HBP7, The Slug Club In-Reply-To: <20060103010702.10570.qmail@web36814.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 145774 AnitaKH wrote: > Questions: > > 1. This is the beginning of what will be a year- long obsession with Draco for Harry. In hindsight, what does this reveal about Harry's powers of discernment? Potioncat: Harry knows Draco is up to something, and he's right. Although he tells responsible individuals who do not find collaborating evidence, he is right about Draco. I hate to say this, but it almost reminds me of Snape and Harry. > > 2. The Aurors in the scene are men we have never seen before. Is this done to highlight the changes at the Ministry of Magic, or is there some more sinister reason? Potioncat: The men reminded me of the movie "Men in Black," or of the general stereotype of the G-man. I think it was JKR's way of showing how the mood is changing in the WW. > > 3. Compare this train scene with the early train scene in OOP. How do his feelings toward Neville and Luna compare in the two scenes? What does this scene do for our understanding of the Harry in HBP? Potioncat: He seems to have grown up and learned what's important. Of course, this time there wasn't some girl to impress. > > > > 5. Neville mentions that his wand may have been the last Ollivander sold before he vanished. Do you think this is one of those throwaway lines that will be significant later? How? > > 6. What is the composition of Neville's wand, and will it be important? Potioncat: We've expected so much of wands. It's hard to say. What's the chance that LV was looking for a special wand and Ollivander sold it to Neville? We learned a lot more about Unicorn hair in this book. I wonder how unicorn hair wands will play out? > > 7. Luna comes up with yet another ? er ? quirky creature. What are the chances that Luna's wacky creatures will be proven real? And if so, which ones? Potioncat: With all the fantastic beasts that do exist in the WW, it's funny that some people would believe in non-existant ones. > > 8. As we learn about each student's connections during Slughorn's luncheon party, whose story, if any, do you suppose will prove to be important in book 7? Potioncat: Well, it's just now dawned on me that Blaise's mother may have killed 6 men. The book doesn't say that of course....I really should go read that section before commenting. > > 9. The luncheon scene with Slughorn highlights the personality traits that we glimpsed in "Horace Slughorn." Did this scene cement your opinion of Slughorn, did it change your first impression from the earlier chapter, or did your opinion undergo a transformation later, say, after seeing the full horcrux memory? Potioncat: It showed what a dirt bag he is, and it made him look worse than DD had. DD does seem to see the best in a person. I was a little surprised that he would have had to ask about Theodore's father. It was in the Prophet that Nott was in the battle and Slughorn knew him from the school days....(Do I have that part correct?) Was he being sneaky by asking about Nott, or was JKR using Blaise to tell us that Slughorn didn't accept family members of DEs? > > > 11. I find the end of this chapter difficult to read, wishing at an emotional level that Harry would use more caution. Harry's impulsiveness has gotten him into scrapes before, and he once again takes a chance and loses. How do you think this tendency will play out? (Curiosity killed the cat or caution makes cowards of us all?) Potioncat: It's the vice of the Gryffindor virtue of courage and it got Sirius killed. I think Harry will tame it during book 7. > Very nice review and thoughtful questions. From darlenejs at yahoo.com Mon Jan 2 06:05:57 2006 From: darlenejs at yahoo.com (darlenejs) Date: Mon, 02 Jan 2006 06:05:57 -0000 Subject: Last book, Harry not surviving In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 145775 > Corey: > > If JKR has the last chapter almost done then the 7th book > > should come out soon, don't you think? > > Geoff: > I'm not sure if you didn't know or have forgotten but JKR was > writing drafts for the last chapter of Book 7 a long time ago. > She made a reference to it in one interview certainly as long > ago as 31/12/99. Sorry if I post this incorrectly, I'm new. I stumbled across an HP website primarily aimed at teenagers right after I finished HBP. There is a link to a website with an interview with JKR; she stated that the 7th book would be out in about 2 years. The interview was an interesting read. Some of the theories teenagers come up with are quite amazing! http://news.bbc.co.uk/cbbcnews/hi/newsid_4690000/newsid_4690800/4690885.stm Happy to meet all of you. Darlene From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Tue Jan 3 03:26:33 2006 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Tue, 03 Jan 2006 03:26:33 -0000 Subject: Who was with Voldemort at GH? /quick PoA question./Real child abuse In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 145776 Ceridwen wrote: > I'm not convinced that the Order spy (we know it's Peter) came to DE meetings. LV may have wanted to keep him under wraps in case there was a traitor in his midst. Or, Peter may not have been a full- fledged DE at the time, in case he would have turned, himself, and reported back to the Order, or if it turned out he was a plant. The events at GH would have blown his cover, since he was the Secret Keeper and neither he nor LV had an absolute way of knowing that the Potters or Sirius hadn't told Dumbledore about the switch. I think that would be the occasion when he was fully initiated, right before going to GH. He would not be able to return to the Order after he was exposed like that. And, possibly, it would mean that he wouldn't turn defense witness against other DEs and LV if things went south. > So, Peter or Sirius, I don't think Snape would have known who the spy was, since I don't think the spy would have been in the DE ranks at meetings. I don't think LV would expose his ace in the hole that way, to so many followers, not just Snape, who would have seen Peter> at school. > Carol responds: Exactly. Just as Severus Snape spied for DD without being a member of the Order, I think PP spied for LV without being a Death Eater. He certainly *became* a DE at some point before the graveyard scene in GoF, but exactly when that was, we don't know. I agree that it was essential in LV's view to keep both PP's identity and his Animagus abilities secret and it's unlikely that Snape knew about them. Also, and this point is crucial, being the spy is not the same as being the Secret Keeper. I don't think there was a Secret Keeper at all until a short time before the Potters were killed. It's unclear whether Sirius was the Secret Keeper at first and was replaced by Peter, or whether Peter was the only SK. But he was SK for only about a week before Godric's Hollow, and Voldemort only knew about the SK arrangement because PP told him. It's possible that LV told Bellatrix about Peter being the SK (trusting her with his most important secrets?), which would explain why she and her three cohorts (the Lestrange brothers and Barty Jr.) were talking about Wormtail in Azkaban, but he (Peter) could not have told Snape because Snape was already teaching at Hogwarts. So if Snape knew there was a Secret Keeper, it was because *Dumbledore* told him, and DD would have told him that Sirius was the SK because that's what he believed himself. And the Daily Prophet story that Black had murdered PP and twelve Muggles (as well as betraying the Potters) would have confirmed Snape's mental image of Sirius Black beautifully. ("He tried to kill *me* when he was sixteen!") Snape's treatment of Peter in "Spinner's End" may have some bearing on all this. I personally think it reflects his contempt for Peter's betrayal of the Potters. As he sees it, he repented his role in revealing the Prophecy to LV and tried to protect his enemy by going to Dumbledore, whereas PP aided and abetted the murder of his own friends. DDM!Snape would see PP's role as beneath contempt and his own as noble or nearly so. I can't come up with a reason why OFH! or ESE!Snape would hold Wormtail in contempt. Ceridwen wrote: > I think that once the secret's been betrayed and the place is in rubble, the protection is no longer in place, but that's just me and I don't know how it would work. But, for Snape to have been there before the actual killings, he would have had to have heard the secret from the SK, or have read a note from him (unlikely IMO, but not impossible). So, though it would be BANGy, even for a DDM!Snape caught off his guard, I don't think the person, if any, at GH with LV, would be Snape. Carol responds: I agree that Peter couldn't have told him, and in any case, we know from "Spinner's End" that Snape was already at Hogwarts when the Potters were killed. He couldn't have known that the secret had been betrayed and LV would try to kill the Potters that night--until his Dark Mark began to fade and he knew it was too late to save them. (Can't prove it, but I think Snape sensed a change in the Dark Mark, watched it fade, and ran immediately to Dumbledore with the news.) Ceridwen wrote: > My guess would be Peter Pettigrew himself. Until LV entered, there was no reason to suspect him, so he could have knocked and gotten James or Lily to open the door, and then in comes LV. Pure surprise, made even moreso by the fact that they trusted Peter and wouldn't have foreseen this event. Also, Peter is still alive and able to tell what happened if Rowling doesn't use the Pensieve idea for a trip back to that night. Carol responds: Good points. But it's also possible that PP watched the events in rat form after leading LV to the house since neither James nor Lily calls out to PP for help or screams out that he's a traitor. James's "It's him!" makes it sound as if LV *appears* to be alone. But hasn't JKR already confirmed in an interview that PP was present and that he hid LV's wand and returned it to him later? Even if she didn't, it's clear that Peter returned the wand to LV when he restored his body, and I don't know how he could do that unless he had hidden the wand from Aurors and Muggles and was able to retrieve it after his escape in GoF. (I think he must have left his own wand behind after he blew up the Muggles as evidence of his own "death.") One semirelated point regarding the Prophecy: It seems to me that young Snape, having been caught eavesdropping, would run immediately to LV to tell him the part of the Prophecy that he had overheard without thinking much about the contents of the obscurely worded prediction. He would be preoccupied with rewards and punishments. Would he be Crucio'd for being caught and hearing only part of the Prophecy or rewarded for bringing his master a valuable bit of news? I don't think he thought in terms of a baby and his parents being murdered. This was just a warning for LV to be on the lookout for a future enemy or rival, someone born in July. As DD pointed out, he couldn't have known who it applied to or how LV would choose to interpret it, much less that LV would try to prevent its fulfillment by murdering a baby. *We* know what the Prophecy means, more or less, because we've heard it so many times. But to Severus Snape, aged 20 or 21, hearing it for the first time and probably more concerned with LV's reaction to the news than with the news itself, it cannot have been nearly as clear. Carol, certain that PP was at Godric's Hollow but Snape was at Hogwarts that night, having "slithered out" of all DE-related activities for ten months out of twelve by becoming a teacher and ostensible spy From katmac at katmac.cncdsl.com Tue Jan 3 03:40:46 2006 From: katmac at katmac.cncdsl.com (lagattalucianese) Date: Tue, 03 Jan 2006 03:40:46 -0000 Subject: "Stand aside, girl" and the End In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 145777 > > Actually ? what's the meaning of locking love in a room? I find this > picture quite intriguing. What's the meaning of locking it in a > room, what are the dangers of it? > > Orna > La Gatta Lucianese: This has a curious resonance with Snape's claim that he can teach his students "how to bottle fame, brew glory, even stopper death". We know from Slughorn that it is possible to brew good fortune--the Felix Felicis potion. Is it also possible to concentrate and store up love until it is needed (that is, real love, not passion, the usual outcome of so-called "love" potions)? > >Orna: >About further duelling - I rather think voldemort would tamper with >his wand, than giving up the final duel. Perhaps, as someone >suggested, that's why Ollivander has disappeared. > La Gatta Lucianese: And Ollivander has been hanging out with the Terrible Twins in Diagon Alley, so when Voldemort points his wand at Harry and shouts, "Avada Kedavra!", it turns into a rubber snake that explodes in a shower of sparkes and a strong odor of dungbomb... (I couldn't resist!) From tuffteff at aol.com Tue Jan 3 01:52:03 2006 From: tuffteff at aol.com (crazedupfruitlloop) Date: Tue, 03 Jan 2006 01:52:03 -0000 Subject: RAB's identity and significance / SHIP: H/G / is Dumbledore dead? / Neville's significance Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 145778 I have some questions that I would like to ask. First, Who do you think is R.A.B that was mentioned in the 6th book and what significance does it have? Will solving this riddle put us closer to the answer of Harry Potter's prophecy? Also do you think that R.A.B is regalus black? And what do we know of him so far? Do you think that the coupling is they way it should be? Also do you think Harry is a fool for giving ginny up? Do you think that Dumbledore is truly dead or just in some way waiting for a break to defeat Voldemort? Or do you think he's dead and that he will come back in some other form? Do you think that Neville will play anymore significance than he already has? Steph From stevejjen at earthlink.net Tue Jan 3 04:33:18 2006 From: stevejjen at earthlink.net (Jen Reese) Date: Tue, 03 Jan 2006 04:33:18 -0000 Subject: "Stand aside, girl" and the End In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 145779 > Alla: > Right, so here are my questions. First of all, how did Voldemort > find out that Lily worked in the Veil room or Love room, if she > indeed did? Just asking for your speculations, of course. Snape or > Peter or something else? Jen: I figured it was probably common knowledge if she was working at the MOM. We saw Bode on the lift and interacting with others in a familiar way, so the DOM employees are not hidden away. Also, Voldemort had spies in the Minstry. Alla: > Why would Voldemort find Lily studying death worrisome? Because he > may think that she is ahead of him in his immortality quest or > something like that and him killing her will not work? I am still > not sure why he would not try though? He certainly tries to kill > Dumbledore in the battle of MoM, no? > I don't know it just > does not make sense to me that even if Voldemort WAS afraid of > Lily or whatever she was studying of a great deal that he would > not TRY to kill her. IMO of course. Questions, questions. Jen: For one thing, at the time of Lily's death Voldemort did not know if his experiements in immortality would work. By the time he faced Dumbledore in the MOM, he had proved to himself his horcruxes were working and believed himself immortal. But that night at GH, facing two powerful wizards who have defied him three times, he doesn't know. And I think if Lily did study in the Veil room, that would be something Voldemort couldn't understand since he's spent his life attempting to defeat death. So I pictured the momentary worry or slight fear to be about his own immortality experiements and perhaps a wonder if Lily knew something he didn't. Maybe even something which would interfere with his experiments? He knows the Potters are in league with Dumbledore and are in hiding, so it's possible he thought there was more to their protections than he was aware. It was only enough to make him pause, whatever the reason, so it wouldn't be something he felt resolved about. I do like other people's suggestions that Voldemort wanted something from Lily, some knowledge, and planned to extract that after killing Harry. > Alla: > I think on that we differ a gret deal or maybe I am wrong and I > misunderstood you. I think that if JKR wanted to play the > temptation theme for Harry, book 6 was a perfect place to do so > AND I believe that the book belonging to Half Blood prince WAS the > temptation in front of Harry, which he sort of fallen for, IMO. > And it does not seem to me that any grand scale temptation will > occur in book 7, IMO of course. I don't think that he will > fall for any of his Lordship tricks, he will be too focused for > that. Jen: I'm thinking about Dumbledore's speech in the horcrux chapter and his emphasis on how Harry's love protects him. And Harry doesn't really understand, sees love as no big deal compared to Voldemort's power. Voldemort's 'lure of power' is his ability to zero in on a person's weakness and use it against him. Like Draco being trapped in HBP, thinking he's been given an honor to be in service to the Dark Lord only to discover he is being used, is a scapegoat, and he and his family are dispensible to Voldemort. Harry of course would not fall for anything having to do with dark arts or the like, but I think he spelled his weakness out: "And if I meet Severus Snape along the way....so much the better for me, so much the worse for him (The White Tomb, p. 607 Bloomsbury) His hatred and need for revenge can be easily manipulated by Voldemort and they counter the love which protects him from such manipulation. It just looked like a perfect set-up to me, hearing about Dumbledore's explanation followed by this intense interaction and increase in hatred for Snape, a crack Voldemort can attempt to use against him. I call it temptation, but perhaps other terms could be used. Or we might just disagree this will happen . Jen From Aisbelmon at hotmail.com Tue Jan 3 04:57:52 2006 From: Aisbelmon at hotmail.com (M.Clifford) Date: Tue, 03 Jan 2006 04:57:52 -0000 Subject: RAB's identity and significance / SHIP: H/G / is Dumbledore dead? / Neville' In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 145780 Steph wrote: > I have some questions that I would like to ask. Valky: Sure, I would love to throw my $0.02 in, fire away. :) Steph: > First, Who do you think is R.A.B that was mentioned in the 6th book > and what significance does it have? Valky: I am certain R.A.B is Sirius' younger brother Regulus. I think that this will have a lot of interesting significance in terms of the way Harry views Slytherin House and people who are attached to it, Harry's notions of Slytherin are still very much skewed by it's association with Voldemort, The Malfoys, Snape and many Death Eaters, learning that a lone young Slytherin was capable of such a profound act of selfless conviction will really shake things up for Harry and help him to respect/embrace the part of himself that would have done well in Slytherin, his psychological shadow self. The main significane of this will be in that we will see how it prepares Harry for his confrontation with Voldemort as well as how he and the students of Hogwarts learn from it are compelled to band together under the banner of Dumbledores words in GOF and the Sorting hat in OOTP of a unified stand against evil. Of course I don't think Regulus' secret would be the *only* catalyst for these changes and progressions within the story but I do think it will be a potent one. Steph: > Will solving this riddle put us closer to the answer of Harry > Potter's prophecy? Valky: In terms of the nature of the Horcruxes, and why Dumbledore said that learning about them has 'everything to do with' the Prophecy, Yes. It is my guess that Regulus is not the important factor in terms of the prophecy, In fact I think perhaps that Regulus failure to destroy the Locket (since I assume it *was* the hevay loket found among the Black belongings) will be an indication of the Prophecy's road to fulfillment. I truly hope JKR answers question two of her current FAQ because I think that key to the destruction of a Horcrux is that Harry has been marked as Voldemort's Equal according to the prophecy. So in short, yes, I do think that RAB being Regulus and hence the Locket being intact more than a decade after he sought to destroy it will put us closer to understanding the Prophecy, even while the Prophecy is just a bunch of words that is only true because Voldemort puts so much stock in it. Steph: > Do you think that the coupling is they way it should be? Valky: Yes, I do. The couples if I dare say so myself, are all exactly as I hoped and "shipped" for, I know others are disappointed, but I am not. :) Steph: > Also do you think Harry is a fool for giving ginny up? Valky: I doubt he has truly given her up. I tend to think that his reaction in HBP was somewhat kneejerk and I don't think his conviction is as real as he'd hope although he is guaranteed to try and stick it out in book seven. Steph: > Do you think that Dumbledore is truly dead or just in some way > waiting for a break to defeat Voldemort? Valky: Definitely dead. He has moved on to the next great adventure. But I don't think we have seen the last of him or his influential prescence in Harry's life. Harry will timeturn (or something similar) in book seven and his path will definitely cross with Dumbledore's at some point, I am sure. Also in HBP I think Dumbledore trained Harry in how to understand what he (DD) is saying *without* words (e.g. How Harry realised DD was guiding him to see Voldemorts treasure collecting habits without explicitly telling him that). At the end of PS/SS Harry deduces that Dumbledore somehow had allowed him to confront Voldemort if he wanted to because it was his right to. I think that this line is definitely a foreshadowing of Dumbledore's presence in Book seven, Harry will eventually understand what Dumbledore was trying to tell him without words. > Steph: > Do you think that Neville will play anymore significance than he > already has? > Valky: Neville definitely has a significant role to play in book seven. Some thoughts on this, there is a pattern based on Alchemy, in which Neville's significance has been two times out of three connected with an orb shaped object. ie the Rememberall and the Prophecy Orb. If there is anything to this pattern then it is certain that Nevilles very significant role in Book Seven will involve an orb shaped thing. Any Ideas? Valky From kking0731 at gmail.com Tue Jan 3 05:05:04 2006 From: kking0731 at gmail.com (Kathy King) Date: Tue, 3 Jan 2006 00:05:04 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] CHAPDISC: HBP7, The Slug Club In-Reply-To: <20060103010702.10570.qmail@web36814.mail.mud.yahoo.com> References: <20060103010702.10570.qmail@web36814.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 145781 *AnitaKH;* CHAPTER DISCUSSIONS: Blaise reports on the lunch with Slughorn, mentioning the attendees. We discover that Ginny is generally popular with Hogwarts boys, even passing Zabini's standards. As they discuss Slughorn, Malfoy casually mentions that he might not even be at Hogwarts the following year. Draco hints that he may be on to "bigger and better" things, and he allows the others to suggest he will be working for LV. When Zabini expresses his doubts that LV would be interested in an unqualified 16 year old, Malfoy says perhaps LV has a job for him that doesn't require him to be qualified. Snow: Now this is interesting?LV has a job that doesn't require Draco to be qualified, hmmmmm. Apparently Draco was only initially informed, and he believed, that his requirement was to fix the vanishing cabinets thus the 'not being qualified' statement and the self-assured attitude from Draco. It would only follow that Draco Became aware what his true assignment was (to attempt to kill DD) after the year had begun, say somewhere around the time he was caught by Harry crying to none other than the muggleborn Moaning Myrtle of all species. Draco finally learned what was really expected of him and not only confided in but fell to pieces in front of a mudblood. Draco, the pureblood, confiding in a deceased mudblood of his emotional distraught, how is that possible unless Draco was introduced to his new assignment? Oh how did DD know? That Snape fellow just always seems to end up in the right place at the right time. ;) A question arises if this is correct, and I feel it is, why didn't Narcissa warn her son of what was truly expected of him (because she knew!)? Was Narcissa simply trying to protect her son from the real truth hoping that Snape would cover for him? Why would Narcissa put ALL her trust in Snape? Was it an Oh-Snape-you-won't-let-my-baby-die-like-he-did-to-yours moment? *AnitaKH;* 9. The luncheon scene with Slughorn highlights the personality traits that we glimpsed in "Horace Slughorn." Did this scene cement your opinion of Slughorn, did it change your first impression from the earlier chapter, or did your opinion undergo a transformation later, say, after seeing the full horcrux memory? Snow: >From the moment I was introduced to Slughorn he quite reminded me of Fudge. Neither of them wants to make a real choice, fence sitters. Both of them admire Dumbledore but neither Slughorn nor Fudge are willing to totally choose sides that could damage their reputation with getting ahead as far as the Ministry is involved?they have their own reputation to think of you know?and they both paid a price for their intentional indecisiveness. *AnitaKH;* 11. I find the end of this chapter difficult to read, wishing at an emotional level that Harry would use more caution. Harry's impulsiveness has gotten him into scrapes before, and he once again takes a chance and loses. How do you think this tendency will play out? (Curiosity killed the cat or caution makes cowards of us all?) Snow: Harry is true to his convictions even though a lot of times his impulses put others in the face of danger. The people who joined the Order of the Phoenix knew that there were things worth dieing for and that was their choice, they knew the cause was worth more than themselves. Harry doesn't even think that others could be in jeopardy because of his rash-like decisions but knows that it was the right thing to do. Of course Harry would look back and see where his decisions affected others in a negative way and feel remorseful but the real question would be, would Harry have chosen differently if he had thought about it? Sometimes there is no way out of hurting others in the attempt to do what's right. Dumbledore didn't want to leave Harry at the Dursley's but he knew that it was the ultimate protection. The difference with Harry and even Dumbledore's decision to leave him at the Dursley's is time. Harry never has time to mull over whether or not someone else would be affected by his decisions. When and if Harry does have a slight moment (like with the threstrals), he does want Ginny and Neville to stay behind. Harry feels responsible for them in the MOM even though he didn't want them to come and they both made choices that helped him. There's nothing cut and dry about decisions. All decisions affect someone else. It was Harry's decision to reject Neville's decision to come to the MOM with him, who's at fault if something happens to Neville when he insisted on coming? But if it weren't for Neville? It's our decisions? Snow [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Tue Jan 3 05:05:17 2006 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Tue, 03 Jan 2006 05:05:17 -0000 Subject: Real child abuse/ Snape again/Draco as ferret /Love and Vengeance/Ending In-Reply-To: <60.648b570b.30eb2a78@aol.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 145782 > Alla wrote: > > NO, I am not saying that torturing the child is Okay, but I am > saying that making Draco bounce a few times is OK within the > narrative? Why? Because of whom he is. In RL I would not advocate teacher using ANY physical punishments on > the child like EVER. > > > Julie now: > But haven't you argued that JKR's Wizarding World is a reflection > of the real world, and that is why you consider Snape's actions toward > Harry and Neville abusive? If different standards in the WW, i.e. within > the story narrative, aren't a mitigating factor there, then why is it okay > for > Draco to be abused within the narrative if it wouldn't be okay in RL? Alla: Trying again - OK not necessarily in the ethical sense, because as I said in my earlier post, I think that this scene with characters names crossed out definitely constitutes abuse, BUT OK as bad guy getting his dues - sort of another layer of interpretation if it makes any sense. Hmmmm, maybe this way it will make more sense. I can interpret "bouncing ferret" scene several ways and doing it simultaneously: 1. Child abuse. 2. The funny and emotionally satisfactory scene because bad guy is getting punished. I see both interpretations together, but the first one that jumps at me is bad guy being punished, that is why I won't care much that it is child abuse since I like to see bad guy being punished. But of course even if it IS funny to me, it does not stop being abuse, you know? Julie: > And, yes, as readers we may get a bit of enjoyment at seeing Draco > getting his just desserts here. But we can still know it was wrong, and > that Fake!Moody was abusing his position, just as we can know it's > wrong of Snape to abuse his position with constant nasty comments > to Harry and Neville. Alla: ABSOLUTELY. It IS wrong, IMO. The only difference between your position and mine is that I am getting A LOT of enjoynment out of that scene DESPITE the fact that it was wrong. Look, as I am saying in reply to Carol I picture Snape in the first lesson as "vicious dog" attacking an innocent kid who just came to the unknown world. I think it is SO wrong on SO many levels, BUT I also understand that this scene can be read as extremely enjoyable writing and the person can ignore the wrongness OR don't think that it was wrong at all, because all that person sees is the beauty of Snape's introductory speech about Potions or something like that. I DO see that "bouncing ferret" scene is wrong, but to me it fades because all that I care about is that Draco got to suffer. Personally, I cannot enjoy Snape's speech even though I think it IS beautifuly written, because all that I see is his harassment of Harry, same here I concentrate on " retribution aspect" of that scene, but am indifferent to other aspects. > Carol responds: In part, the dream, like the scar incident, acts as > a red herring to set Snape up as the apparent villain of the book, but > it also shows, IMO, that Harry at least subconsciously distrusts Snape > from the outset, before Snape has spoken a single word to Harry. Alla: I completely disagree. I think that narrator's remark that "Snape had a gift to keep class quiet" shows that Harry WAS open minded enough to see good parts of Snape teaching, but Snape was dead set IMO on alienating Harry from the start. Carol: The > little question-and-answer session in the first Potions class, in > which Snape demonstrates for whatever reason that "our new celebrity" > doesn't know a bezoar from wolfbane, reinforces Harry's preconceptions > about Snape. (No doubt it reinforces Snape's preconceptions about > Harry as well.) Alla: Sorry, when I reread this scene I picture Snape as "vicious dog" barking at the innocent child. I don't think that Harry HAD any preconceptions about Snape to be reinforced and whatever preconceptions Snape had is a problem of emotionally challenged man, stuck in his past. Carol: And, as I said > earlier, Harry's distrust of him predates that class. He *does* have a > clue who Snape is before that; he learns before the first class that > Snape is the head of Slytherin House. Alla: Sorry, but the fact that Harry knows who Snape is does not mean IMO that he distrusts him. But who knows maybe it was a Seer dream. > Alla: > > I am sure that Harry will not kill Snape... BUT I also think that > > at some point in book 7, Snape WILL stand absolutely powerless at > > Harry's mercy AND I think Snape will hate it very much. That would > > be SUFFICIENT for me to see Snape powerless even for a brief > > moment in time ( for all six years of Harry being powerless in > > front of Snape) > > SSSusan: > Right. This would be Harry experiencing mercy *not* at the same > moment that he wants vengeance, correct? It's the desire for > vengeance occurring at the same time as an act of mercy or > forgiveness which seems totally incongruous to me. Alla: Oh, YES, YES of course. I told you earlier how much I loved your post, but I just wanted to be sure I am clear - I agree with you on other points as well, but I also do NOT think that Harry will be feeling mercy and vengeance at the same time. It will be a weird writing indeed, believability wise. I want to kill you, no , I changed my mind, and I want to forgive you now. :-) I think Snape will get his dues either prior to Harry forgiving him - if he is DD!M, OR afterwards ( dying from somebody else's hand OR by accident of fate) if he is evil. So, we do agree that despite the fact that Love will be the main theme at the end, the bad guys ( whoever they are - here we differ a bit :-)) will be punished, but probably not from Harry's hand. :-) Right? > [Lupinlore in same thread, different post:] > > If, on the other hand, he says "I refuse to raise my wand against > > you, O Voldemort, for despite that you have tormented me I refuse > > to sink to thy contrivance," I honestly think I'll have to be > > rushed to the hospital for treatment of life-threatening nausea. > > > SSSusan: > I think this goes back to what Alla said about faith in JKR's > writing. She & I seem to have a good deal more faith in that than > you do. For me, I see no reason to expect that an ending involving > love or forgiveness or mercy would necessarily involve sermonizing > or preaching. Alla: Yep, yep, yep, Susan. Lupinlore, you KNOW that we agree on great deal of many things, but I just have to ask you WHAT caused you to be afraid that JKR's characters will talk the way you described? WHERE in canon JKR's characters EVER talked like that? I found the wording you described INCREDIBLY funny, but also SO not JKR's like. IMO of course. I want the endings you described, absolutely. Harry protecting Wormtail by instinct will be nicely done indeed OR Harry protecting Snape by instinct will be nicely done too, IMO. That is indeed will be one of my favorite punishments of Snape, as I said many times - let him live and let Harry live of course and let Snape be in direct Life Debt to Harry. But I am with SSSusan on this one. I may not LIKE some endings JKR will come up with, but I will not think that they are crappy writing. I have faith in the lady. :-) After all , during 6 books, she only disappointed me once and that was partial disappointment. I think it is pretty good score :) I think she could finish with gusto. ;) I will not be reading books again, if Harry is dead at the end, but I will still not call JKR a bad writer, personally. JMO of course, Alla From bawilson at citynet.net Tue Jan 3 04:45:53 2006 From: bawilson at citynet.net (Bruce Alan Wilson) Date: Mon, 2 Jan 2006 23:45:53 -0500 Subject: Hobbsian worlds; Crime & Punishment Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 145783 lealess: "This is akin to the reason I believe her world is Hobbesian, as I understand the word. The wizarding world is basically brutish and nasty. Perhaps the perception of people as being tainted by original sin determines this. People have limited choices within this world, and they almost always act to further their own selfish interest. Only authority can keep the society in order and everyone off each others' throats, but authority takes natural rights away from people." BAW: And this is different from the real world BECAUSE. . . . ? Jen: "It was an amusing idea for Filch to cry for the thumbscrews and chains, but to actually see such cruelty in action made Snape pale in comparison for me. I think the fact he was a known and predictable quanitity for Harry after the first class is a mitigating factor in my mind: For 6 books Harry's been hearing the same needling, the same taunts, the same James complex, the same zeros, the same points taken--come on, get some new material Severus!" BAW: Exactly. Snape is like a bulldog with no teeth. He may growl and snarl and snap, but he doesn't bite. The only time he laid a hand on Harry was when he found Harry snooping in his Pensive. And, if I had found a student reading my private diary--the nearest equivalent I can think of in the primary world--I probably would have reacted violently, too. elfundeb: "Instead, I think Harry will discover that the key to vanquishing Voldemort is love, exemplified by mercy. Voldemort will understand that he is wholly dependent on Harry's mercy. And Harry, being pure in heart, will grant it." BAW: Harry can't love Voldemort; nobody can love Voldemort. But, he CAN love Tom Riddle. I have written and posted here a little scene in which Harry appeals to what is left of Tom underneath the Voldemort persona. It ends with the Order finding Harry embracing a weeping young man, who--if his eyes were not swollen shut, his nose all puffy, and his face covered with snot and tears--would have been quite handsome. Harry says to them, "Voldemort is no more. But I'd like to introduce you to my new friend--Tommy Riddle." Betsy Hp: "Now how on earth am I supposed to take your opinions about child abuse seriously when you say torturing a child is okay? That *is* what you're saying, yes? Dropping a transfigured Draco onto a stone floor from such a hight he actually bounces is fine and dandy. Catching Harry in the middle of a wrong doing and calling him on it is abuse. I'm sorry, but your logic completely escapes me." BAW: There is no evidence that Draco was in any way harmed by the experience aside from a good fright and a bit of embarrassment. And nobody ever died of either. That being said, even by WW standards the punishment was OOT; MM came as close as she ever did to telling off a colleague in front of students (pre-Umbridge) over it, and I think we can take MM as something of the 'conscience' of Hogwarts. Betsy Hp: "I'm really uncomfortable with that sort of philosophy. Rather than using rules fairly applied to everybody, some rules are made for one sort of person and other rules are made for another sort. So, Draco deserves to be physically tortured because of who he is. But Neville should never be challenged because of who he is." BAW: Right. Neville is a nice person. Draco's a jerk. But Neville WAS challenged; remember his transformation from Wimp!Neville to KickA@@!Neville in OotP? And, academically, he was able to pull off a respectable number of OWLS. From juli17 at aol.com Tue Jan 3 05:59:32 2006 From: juli17 at aol.com (juli17ptf) Date: Tue, 03 Jan 2006 05:59:32 -0000 Subject: "Stand aside, girl" and the End In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 145784 > > Alla: > > Why would Voldemort find Lily studying death worrisome? Because he > > may think that she is ahead of him in his immortality quest or > > something like that and him killing her will not work? I am still > > not sure why he would not try though? He certainly tries to kill > > Dumbledore in the battle of MoM, no? > I don't know it just > > does not make sense to me that even if Voldemort WAS afraid of > > Lily or whatever she was studying of a great deal that he would > > not TRY to kill her. IMO of course. Questions, questions. > Jen: For one thing, at the time of Lily's death Voldemort did not > know if his experiements in immortality would work. By the time he > faced Dumbledore in the MOM, he had proved to himself his horcruxes > were working and believed himself immortal. But that night at GH, > facing two powerful wizards who have defied him three times, he > doesn't know. And I think if Lily did study in the Veil room, that > would be something Voldemort couldn't understand since he's spent > his life attempting to defeat death. > > So I pictured the momentary worry or slight fear to be about his own > immortality experiements and perhaps a wonder if Lily knew something > he didn't. Maybe even something which would interfere with his > experiments? He knows the Potters are in league with Dumbledore and > are in hiding, so it's possible he thought there was more to their > protections than he was aware. It was only enough to make him pause, > whatever the reason, so it wouldn't be something he felt resolved > about. I do like other people's suggestions that Voldemort wanted > something from Lily, some knowledge, and planned to extract that > after killing Harry. Julie: This theory is interesting but I do have one problem with it. If Voldemort had reason to worry or slightly fear that Lily might have some unknown protection, why not either kill her quickly, or perform some other spell that gets her out of the way without actually killing her (thus avoiding any unknown protection she might have learned in the Veil room? Why play around at all by offering her her life in such a glib manner? And if he wanted to extract some information from her, why kill her at all? Why not just petrify her or use some other binding spell, take care of Harry, then return to Lily and force the information he wants out of her as he did with Bertha Jorkins? Also, should we perhaps be focusing on why James *had* to die? (Kind of like "Why Voldemort didn't die, rather than why Harry lived?") Was it simply because James attacked immediately while Lily ran to Harry to protect him? Or did LV always intend to kill James? Perhaps the answer would help us understand why Lily didn't have to die. It's a thought anyway ;-) Julie From lealess at yahoo.com Tue Jan 3 06:17:52 2006 From: lealess at yahoo.com (lealess) Date: Tue, 03 Jan 2006 06:17:52 -0000 Subject: CHAPDISC: HBP7, The Slug Club In-Reply-To: <20060103010702.10570.qmail@web36814.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 145785 --- AnitaKH wrote: > 1. This is the beginning of what will be a year- > long obsession with Draco for Harry. In hindsight, what does this > reveal about Harry's powers of discernment? lealess: They are still limited. Draco is close in age to him and is his obvious mirror-rival, which is part of the reason I believe Harry focuses on him. Yet Draco turns away from being a house leader, a prefect and a seeker. He shows signs of being in physical, if not emotional, distress. Harry's been there (headaches, rages). In some way, he *knows* Draco, because Draco is supposed to be his mirror opposite, the one he's defined himself against, and something's changed. There are glimpses of Harry developing discernment through empathy, yet this seems selective and short-lived (in this book, Merope Gaunt and Tom Riddle). He doesn't know how to manipulate Slughorn, his "assignment"; he's totally off the mark with Tonks; he is uncomfortable with the Ron/Hermione thing, not wanting to look too deeply into it; he doesn't even seem to know McLaggen, of his own house; he believes the Half-Blood Prince really is a prince of a guy. He blindly follows Dumbledore and throws that in Scrimgeour's face. His discernment needs improvement. His empathy needs improvement, too. He feels regret after Sectumsempra, but that's over when Snape asks him for his potions book, and completely over when he kisses Ginny. > 3. Compare this train scene with the early > train scene in OOP. How do his feelings toward Neville and Luna > compare in the two scenes? What does this scene do for our > understanding of the Harry in HBP? > 4. In this chapter, Harry spends time with people of two very > different rungs on the social ladder: the Slug Club -v- Neville > and Luna (whose lack of popularity is touched upon several times > in this chapter... . > Discuss Harry's very different opinions of the two social circles. lealess: Earlier, Harry was thinking about impressing Cho, and didn't know Luna and Neville. Now, Harry does not seem concerned with social connections at all. He has been an underdog most of his life and can appreciate the view from the bottom. He probably just feels lucky to have friends, but he doesn't need tons of them. Luna and Neville demand nothing of him. They have proved their loyalty, as well. Just as he is Dumbledore's man, he is true to those who are true to him. He doesn't trust easily, especially in view of his upbringing and celebrity. He is not such a reverse snob that he totally rejects the Slug Club, however; it just is not important to him. And presumably he doesn't have to impress Ginny, though he probably won't buddy up to Zacharias Smith any time soon. > What about Draco's perception of where he is on the > social ladder? (the attempt to impress that seemingly was trigger > by being snubbed by Slughorn, his relationship with Pansy who seems > determined to form some kind of attachment to him, etc.) lealess: Draco is his parents' son, with an inherited social position and the expectations and obligations that go with it. He has never had to look beyond that and would probably be severely reproached if he did. He may have been insecure and felt he had to keep up the show, it was expected of him; hence, the toadies and the protest about Slughorn. Except for the shock of Harry's snubbing his offer of friendship and Hermione's besting him in class, he probably had no reason to question his privilege and parents' worldview until it was all made irrelevant by his predicament in the HBP. > 5. Neville mentions that his wand may have been > the last Ollivander sold before he vanished. Do you think this is > one of those throwaway lines that will be significant later? How? > 6. What is the composition of Neville's wand, > and will it be important? lealess: I assumed it was important the moment I read it, but other than making Neville a more competent wizard, I have no idea what role the wand will play... maybe his wand has a phoenix feather, too, and he and Harry will cast a double whammy on Voldemort... or it's a match to Snape's so if Snape did indeed cast an AK on the Headmaster and turns his wand on Neville, Dumbledore will come out of the wand to advise Neville? (This makes me wonder where the portrait spirit resides -- it's just a memory, right? What's in the wand, then? It's supposed to be a representation of the last spell cast, but in the GOF graveyard, these representations had consciousness and will, if only briefly.) > 7. Luna comes up with yet another ? er ? quirky > creature. What are the chances that Luna's wacky creatures will be > proven real? And if so, which ones? lealess: I suspect Luna exists for comic delight as well as unvarnished truth, and generally we can tell which is which, if she (or the readers of The Quibbler) cannot. > 8. As we learn about each student's connections > during Slughorn's luncheon party, whose story, if any, do you > suppose will prove to be important in book 7? lealess: I can confidently say Harry. Then maybe Neville and Ginny. McLaggen might get in someone's way at a critical moment, Zabini might strike a pose, Belby...er. They've probably already served their purpose in the story. > 9. The luncheon scene with Slughorn highlights > the personality traits that we glimpsed in "Horace Slughorn." Did > this scene cement your opinion of Slughorn, did it change your first > impression from the earlier chapter, or did your opinion undergo a > transformation later, say, after seeing the full horcrux memory? lealess: I am keeping an open mind on Slughorn. He has failings, and he's obviously not meant to be appealing, but he seems more weak than evil. So far, I feel sorry for him. I think he's lonely and frightened, and the connections and candies are only meant to cover up his awareness of those things. > 10. We see that Pansy and Draco seem to be a couple, based on > this scene. Will this have any significance in the future? (oh, > like, say, Pansy's is Draco's hideout or something ) lealess: Maybe she is a Narcissa-in-waiting: her love is true and will contribute to Draco's redemption. No, wait, they're Slytherins... > 11. I find the end of this chapter difficult to > read, wishing at an emotional level that Harry would use more > caution. Harry's impulsiveness has gotten him into scrapes before, > and he once again takes a chance and loses. How do you think this > tendency will play out? (Curiosity killed the cat or caution makes > cowards of us all?) lealess: Harry is reckless, and it is his heart that leads him to be this way (sorry to sound like Snape here, but he's right). He leaps into action before thinking, relying on intuition over reason. In this case, he ended up injured and alone. Did he learn a lesson? In the bathroom, he again spied on and eventually "rough justiced" Draco -- yes, in self-defense, but without knowing what spell he was using, pulling an unknown out of a hat. Did he learn a lesson? Look at his teacher: in the cave, similar tally-ho actions by Dumbledore led to the disaster on the Astronomy Tower. Hopefully Harry will listen to Ron, a strategist, and Hermione, a researcher, before hurling himself into his next adventure. They are brave enough to follow him, but not quite so reckless. Otherwise, he is heading for a Ministry- or Tower-sized disaster, I fear. Great questions! lealess From h2so3f at yahoo.com Tue Jan 3 06:56:18 2006 From: h2so3f at yahoo.com (h2so3f) Date: Tue, 03 Jan 2006 06:56:18 -0000 Subject: CHAPDISC: HBP7, The Slug Club In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 145786 AKH wrote: "1. This is the beginning of what will be a year-long obsession with Draco for Harry. In hindsight, what does this reveal about Harry's powers of discernment?" CH3ed: I think Harry pays attention to details. He doesn't miss a lot of things (he errs on the side of paying too much attention). Ron laughs upon hearing of Harry's suspicion because he is underestimating Draco. Harry isn't. AKH wrote: "2. The Aurors in the scene are men we have never seen before. Is this done to highlight the changes at the Ministry of Magic, or is there some more sinister reason?" CH3ed: No ideas. :O) I don't think there is much to make about that. Assuming that the MoM is a large organization (administering the entire Great Britain), we can't expect Harry to have seen all of its agents (even the local ones). Harry saw some MoM agents when he was with Arthur Weasley. It doesn't appear that Arthur is in the same circle with Scrimgeor, so I'm not seeing a lot in it. AHK wrote: "3. Compare this train scene with the early train scene in OOP. How do his feelings toward Neville and Luna compare in the two scenes? What does this scene do for our understanding of the Harry in HBP?" CH3ed: I assume you meant the scene where Harry wished he wasn't sitting with Neville and Luna all covered in stinksap when Cho popped in on them in OotP. I think Harry's learned to choose those he knows would stick with him even in bad times as friends. His first instinct on people's always been quite good (in Book 1 he chose to hang with Ron rather than Malfoy) and he has refined it since. It seems Harry isn't into making fast friends, and Neville and Luna have proven themselves trustworthy from the DA and the ordeal with Umbridge and the fight at the DoM. Harry refrains from making fun of his friends when they goof or make loony comments and he stands up for them. The boy's got a good head on his shoulder. AHK wrote: "4. In this chapter, Harry spends time with people of two very different rungs on the social ladder: the Slug Club -v- Neville and Luna (whose lack of popularity is touched upon several times in this chapter: Romilda's comments, DA being a source of Luna's only friends, Neville's own grandmother's wish for Harry as a grandson etc.). Discuss Harry's very different opinions of the two social circles. What about Draco's perception of where he is on the social ladder? (the attempt to impress that seemingly was trigger by being snubbed by Slughorn, his relationship with Pansy who seems determined to form some kind of attachment to him, etc.)" CH3ed: I think the good thing with Harry being such a marked man all these years is that he is wearied of it and doesn't need others to stoke his ego for him to be sure of his own worth. Draco is the opposite. Much is expected of him by his father and the social status he was born into, but he has been unremarkable. He might have been good in potion and a decent flyer, but he is eclipsed by Hermione in all the classes and by Harry on the Quidditch field and elsewhere. Draco, like Slug, hangs with the 'elites' pure blood in order to be associated with them because 'status' is priority to them, Harry goes for character instead. I don't know what the deal with Pansy is. It is notable that the distraught Malfoy went to Moaning Murtle for comfort rather than to Pansy (in Septum Sempra chapter). AHK wrote: "5. Neville mentions that his wand may have been the last Ollivander sold before he vanished. Do you think this is one of those throwaway lines that will be significant later? How?" CH3ed: It might be. It seems to me that a lot of wizards aren't aware about that 'the wand chooses the wizard, and a wizard doesn't do as good magic with other's wand' thing (that's what Ollivander told Harry in PS/SS). Ron used Charlie's old wand until PoA, and Neville used his father's until HBP. I suspect that that Neville's wand now fits him is a part of how his magic has improved in HBP. AHK wrote: "6. What is the composition of Neville's wand, and will it be important?" CH3ed: Unicorn hair. The same type with Cedric's and Ron's. I don't know if there is anything to be made of that or not. AHK wrote: "7. Luna comes up with yet another ? er ? quirky creature. What are the chances that Luna's wacky creatures will be proven real? And if so, which ones?" CH3ed: Gee...Dunno... Sometimes Luna reminds me of Trelawney's day to day predictions... You know, seems like Trelawney does see something but she interprets it wrong in her tendency to over-dramatizes it. Maybe there are creatures similar to ones Luna describes but not exactly as she puts it. AHK wrote: "9. The luncheon scene with Slughorn highlights the personality traits that we glimpsed in "Horace Slughorn." Did this scene cement your opinion of Slughorn, did it change your first impression from the earlier chapter, or did your opinion undergo a transformation later, say, after seeing the full horcrux memory?" CH3ed: My opinion of Slug didn't change until the Christmas party when he allowed Draco to stay after Filch had collared him (Slug let him stay). Slug has always struck me as a slytherin (what's in it for me? thing) and not a very brave person (or he wouldn't have been hiding from DD). AHK wrote: "10. We see that Pansy and Draco seem to be a couple, based on this scene. Will this have any significance in the future? (oh, like, say, Pansy's is Draco's hideout or something )" CH3ed: I suspect Pansy loves Draco but maybe it isn't really returned. I have no idea what the significance of their relationship is. AHK wrote: "11. I find the end of this chapter difficult to read, wishing at an emotional level that Harry would use more caution. Harry's impulsiveness has gotten him into scrapes before, and he once again takes a chance and loses. How do you think this tendency will play out? (Curiosity killed the cat or caution makes cowards of us all?)" CH3ed: I'm actually glad it happened that way. It is a good lesson for Harry indeed, and it could have turned out much much worse had he done that with someone more dangerous than Draco. As it is Harry escaped with just a broken nose and a bruised ego...and a good lesson to be more cautious with his actions in the future because he is not invincible. I'm actually surprised by the level of recklessness Harry showed. He wasn't underestimating Draco before when he told Ron and Hermione of his suspicion, but what Harry did on the train was mind-blowingly stupid. Thanks goodness for Tonks!! AHK wrote: "12. Please add any questions/comments of your own for discussion" CH3ed: I think AHK does such a good job on the chapter I haven't got much to add. :O) I'm just surprised that Hermione, for all her brain, doesn't pick up on the drastic change in Malfoy (or rather, isn't more alarmed by it). CH3ed :O) From vuurdame at xs4all.nl Tue Jan 3 08:38:41 2006 From: vuurdame at xs4all.nl (festuco) Date: Tue, 03 Jan 2006 08:38:41 -0000 Subject: The Dursleys In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 145787 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "lealess" wrote: > > Putting aside the comeuppance aspects of this discussion, the odd thing > to me is that the Dursleys are the adults in the house they own, and > Harry is the child and, more-or-less, a guest. The Dursleys have > apparently agreed to house Harry at Privet Drive. Have the Dursleys > invited Ron and Hermione to stay with them? Isn't that what adults get > to decide, not children? I know children can ask if their friends > can stay over, but moving in to live somewhere for who knows how > long ... how can Harry, Ron or Hermione decide that without the > Dursleys' express invitation and acceptance? Did I miss something > (possible -- I don't have the book with me now). Or is this just > another example of the magical world running over the Muggle world for > its own purposes (*if* Ron and Hermione stay at Privet Drive)? > > lealess > It can easily be that. And if Ron and Hermione will be staying it probably will be that. Will the Dursley's be asked, or is it going to be a token asking? The kind of asking that has huge consequences if the answer is not the right one? The Wizarding World is more powerful, and they know it. If there were more Wizards, things could easily be very different, but because they are a rather small group, they understand that more power on the individual level fails against huge numbers. But I expect it will be something like "Dumbledore is dead and the baddies are now after Harry." Two adult wizards are good to have in the house in such times, like Steve said. So there will be much grinding of teeth and much counting of hours until finally the 31th of July will arrive and the Dursleys can throw the litte pesk into the streets, where he will have a soft landing because of his enormous vaults of gold at Gringotts. Is anybody else also so very curious whether Dumbledore has left a will and what is in it? Gerry From DaveH47 at mindspring.com Tue Jan 3 09:28:34 2006 From: DaveH47 at mindspring.com (Dave Hardenbrook) Date: Tue, 3 Jan 2006 01:28:34 -0800 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: CHAPDISC: HBP7, The Slug Club In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <1143619167.20060103012834@mindspring.com> No: HPFGUIDX 145788 Monday, January 2, 2006, 7:13:40 PM, potioncat wrote: p> With all the fantastic beasts that do exist in the WW, it's funny p> that some people would believe in non-existant ones. The way I see it, with all the fantastic beasts that exist in the WW, it's funny that some people would be so certain that the "wacky" ones *are* non-existant -- It reminds me of how on _Sesame Street_, for so many years, the grown-ups refused to believe the existence of Big Bird's friend the Snuffle-Upagus -- Even though they obviously had no problem believing in an eight-foot tall talking bird!! -- Dave From vuurdame at xs4all.nl Tue Jan 3 10:24:57 2006 From: vuurdame at xs4all.nl (festuco) Date: Tue, 03 Jan 2006 10:24:57 -0000 Subject: Twins and Dudley In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 145789 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "a_svirn" wrote: > a_svirn: > I think the very existence of this on-going debate proves you wrong, > Steve. Some people obviously do not find humiliating pranks > hysterically funny. > > As for human nature ? let's face it: cruelty is indeed a part of > human nature and no joking. It's hardly an excuse for being cruel, > though. Nope, its not, but I really think that if Harry had picked up a sweat and eaten it Dudley would have found it hystirical. Just as his parents. So I'm really not so very sorry for him. Gerry From gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk Tue Jan 3 11:02:27 2006 From: gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk (Geoff Bannister) Date: Tue, 03 Jan 2006 11:02:27 -0000 Subject: Harry as a Horcrux In-Reply-To: <20060102222828.26527.qmail@web51413.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 145790 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Dan S wrote: > > > Antosha: > > I'm ambivalent about the Harry-as-Horcrux theories. > > It seems likely to me that Harry's vanquishing of > > Voldy will in fact center around an act of self- > > sacrifice on his part, but the Horcrux theory... > > :shrugs: stormydog2000: > I think that after you murder someone, you then use > the spell to make a horcrux... this did not happen > with Harry, the murder failed! He (Harry) just had > powers tranferred from LV to him. Geoff: (1) But surely the point is, if Voldemort had killed Harry, he would not be a Horcrux, he would have been the vehicle used to create one. (2) I don't subscribe to the Harry-is-a-Horcrux theory. To save bandwidth, may I point you to message 139859 where I set out my reasons why? From rdoliver30 at yahoo.com Tue Jan 3 06:11:37 2006 From: rdoliver30 at yahoo.com (lupinlore) Date: Tue, 03 Jan 2006 06:11:37 -0000 Subject: Real child abuse/ Snape again/Draco as ferret /Love and Vengeance/Ending In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 145791 > Alla: > > Yep, yep, yep, Susan. Lupinlore, you KNOW that we agree on great > deal of many things, but I just have to ask you WHAT caused you to > be afraid that JKR's characters will talk the way you described? > WHERE in canon JKR's characters EVER talked like that? I found the > wording you described INCREDIBLY funny, but also SO not JKR's like. > IMO of course. > Oh, I'm being tongue in cheek. I have no fear that the characters will lapse into bad faux-Shakespearian dialogue. But I have EVERY fear that they will lapse into something so badly done that she might as well use faux-Shakespearian dialogue. A great deal of my respect for JKR's writing ability went out the window when she took the coward's way out with regard to Harry's grief and rage at Dumbledore over Sirius. In other words, she did exactly what I was afraid she would by having Harry say to Dumbledore, "I won't mourn or rage because Sirius wouldn't want it. All is forgiven between us and let's get Voldemort!" Incredibly bad and unbelievable writing, that. Lupinlore From willsonkmom at msn.com Tue Jan 3 13:32:56 2006 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Tue, 03 Jan 2006 13:32:56 -0000 Subject: Twins and Dudley In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 145792 Gerry wrote: > > Nope, its not, but I really think that if Harry had picked up a sweat > and eaten it Dudley would have found it hystirical. Just as his > parents. So I'm really not so very sorry for him. > Potioncat: The twins would have laughed too, and would probably given Harry a hard time for taking one, and I think Arthur would still have been mad. From vuurdame at xs4all.nl Tue Jan 3 13:42:51 2006 From: vuurdame at xs4all.nl (festuco) Date: Tue, 03 Jan 2006 13:42:51 -0000 Subject: Hobbsian worlds; Crime & Punishment In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 145793 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Bruce Alan Wilson" wrote: > BAW: > Harry can't love Voldemort; nobody can love Voldemort. But, he > CAN love Tom Riddle. I have written and posted here a little > scene in which Harry appeals to what is left of Tom underneath > the Voldemort persona. It ends with the Order finding Harry > embracing a weeping young man, who--if his eyes were not swollen > shut, his nose all puffy, and his face covered with snot and > tears--would have been quite handsome. Harry says to them, > "Voldemort is no more. But I'd like to introduce you to my new > friend--Tommy Riddle." That would be an ending I'd truly hate. What we've seen of Tom Riddle is that even at eleven he was a little jerk who stole, killed pets and traumatized children younger than he himself. At Hogwarts he opened the Chamber of Secrets, caused the death of Myrtle and got Hagrid expelled. Voldemort is not something that gobbled up Tom Riddle's humanity, it was not there in the first place. Young Tom was a thouroughly rotten human being and certainly not someone Harry could ever call a friend. LV reversing back in age will still result in a rotten power-hungry person. I don't see Harry become a murderer either, but this ending? No, not remotely believable at all. Gerry From thubanofllanmoel at yahoo.co.uk Tue Jan 3 13:32:18 2006 From: thubanofllanmoel at yahoo.co.uk (simon harris) Date: Tue, 3 Jan 2006 13:32:18 +0000 (GMT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: "Stand aside, girl" and the End In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20060103133218.74241.qmail@web25804.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 145794 Julie: >> Also, should we perhaps be focusing on why James *had* to die? (Kind of like "Why Voldemort didn't die, rather than why Harry lived?") Was it simply because James attacked immediately while Lily ran to Harry to protect him? Or did LV always intend to kill James? Perhaps the answer would help us understand why Lily didn't have to die. << Julie, I think James died because he was in Tom's way. Tom was after Harry and I think anyone in his way would just be 'blasted out of the way'. I do not like to use the films for quotes but I can not remember if it is in the books but in the film, PoA, James tell Lily to grab Harry and run. Tom must have known he would have to fight James and Lily, they had already on three occasions done something to unset or get in the way of Tom. Giving Lily the chance to live was possibly a way to make things easier for him [Tom] and he would have killed her in the end anyway. Si From irene_mikhlin at btopenworld.com Tue Jan 3 13:54:23 2006 From: irene_mikhlin at btopenworld.com (Irene Mikhlin) Date: Tue, 3 Jan 2006 13:54:23 +0000 (GMT) Subject: First potions lesson Message-ID: <20060103135423.33266.qmail@web86209.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 145795 People make it sound as if Snape singled out Harry for attacking him with Imperio five times in the row. Rabid dog indeed. He just asked him several questions, which were covered in the textbook. Was it so horribly unfair to expect Harry to know the anwers? "But he lives with Muggles!", you say. So what, so does Hermione, yet she've read the book and knows the answers. "But it's unfair to use Hermione as a yardstick!", you say. Why? Because she is clever and enthusiastic about her studies? That's the very definition of Oustanding-level student, then. Oh, wait, that's the only kind of a student Snape wants in his classes, it's just he can't be selective before Year 6. I read this scene as Snape trying to make two points: 1. I have very high standards here, come to the lessons prepared or suffer. 2. No special treatment for celebrities. Irene ___________________________________________________________ Yahoo! Messenger - NEW crystal clear PC to PC calling worldwide with voicemail http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com From amanda_haffery at hotmail.com Tue Jan 3 13:46:50 2006 From: amanda_haffery at hotmail.com (Amanda Haffery) Date: Tue, 03 Jan 2006 13:46:50 +0000 Subject: RAB's identity and significance / SHIP: H/G / is Dumbledore dead? / Neville's significance In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 145796 Steph: > > Also do you think that R.A.B is Regulus Black? And what do we > know of him so far? Do you think that the coupling is the way > it should be? Also do you think Harry is a fool for giving > Ginny up? Do you think that Dumbledore is truly dead or just > in some way waiting for a break to defeat Voldemort? Or do you > think he's dead and that he will come back in some other form? > Do you think that Neville will play anymore significance than > he already has? Amanda: Ok here's my theory. I do think it's Regulus Black. I think he's going to be sent back as part of the prophecy to either throw Harry off his game with Voldemort or he's going to come back to help Harry defeat the dark lord. I also think Harry was a huge fool to give up Ginny. Hopefully he realizes it in the new book. I'm thinking that in the new book, all the people that died are going to be able to somehow help Harry defeat Voldemort...DD and Sirius included. I don't think they'll actually be alive so much as a force. I think the prophecy is really about Neville. But like I said, these are just my opinions...lol. From c.john at imperial.ac.uk Tue Jan 3 14:09:37 2006 From: c.john at imperial.ac.uk (esmith222002) Date: Tue, 03 Jan 2006 14:09:37 -0000 Subject: DD and Godric's Hollow (Long) Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 145797 I'm sure there must have been a huge number of posts regarding exactly what happened at Godric's Hollow, and if anyone can point me towards the best ones, that would be great. However, in the meantime, I have been thinking a lot about DD's involvement in the events that unfolded after Voldemort's demise. After Voldemort's demise, we know that Harry was found in the rubble by Hagrid. Does this mean that DD never visited Godric's Hollow after Voldemort's defeat? If he had, he would surely not have left Harry in the rubble! But if he didn't visit Godric's Hollow, how did he know that Voldemort had been defeated? The time-frame from the point of Voldemort's failure to kill Harry and Harry's arrival at Privet Drive seems very short. Therefore events must have unfolded fairly rapidly. My guesses are as follows!! Someone was with Voldemort when he attempted to kill Harry. I do not believe that DD can ascertain that Voldemort had been stripped of his physical body without some kind of eye witness account. It was this person who immediately alerted the OOTP. DD who is at Hogwarts immediately dispatches Hagrid to fetch Harry (as I said before, I don't think DD would leave Harry in the rubble). Sirius (who is not at Hogwarts) also receives this information and rushes off to Godric's Hollow. This explains why Sirius & Hagrid turned up at Godric's Hollow at the same time. The fact that Sirius seems unaware of DD's instruction to Hagrid also confirms that DD and Sirius were not together when they learnt of Voldemort's demise. Hagrid uses Sirius' motorbike to fly Harry to DD. But where did DD go next??? Interestingly, Professor McGonagal has somehow learnt that DD intends to bring the boy to Privet Drive and has been staking the place out for some time (probably told by Hagrid, who despite trying to be discrete, will always let some important point slip!). So where did DD disappear to from the time when Voldemort was defeated, to the moment he finally arrived at Privet Drive? As for the eye-witness, well the obvious candidate would be Snape. But why did he not stop Voldemort murdering Lily/James. My wife's theory is that it wasn't until that precise moment that Snape switched sides (i.e. the murder of Lily). And finally (slightly unrelated), what was the object that Voldemort had taken to Godric's Hollow to create the Horcrux? And where is it now? OK, that is quite enough questions!! Happy New Year to all, Brothergib From willsonkmom at msn.com Tue Jan 3 15:19:41 2006 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Tue, 03 Jan 2006 15:19:41 -0000 Subject: Snape's Dementor Essay Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 145798 In the beginning of HBP chapter 21 Ron, and several other 6th years are working on "a viciously difficult essay for Snape." Harry and Hermione have already finished it. Harry expects to get low marks because he disagreed with Snape over the "best way to tackle dementors." I was a little surprised that Harry had finished the essay, looks like his DADA work habits are better than his Potions work habits had been. Later we hear that Seamus went to bed cursing Snape and his essay. Then we have the funny bit about the spell-check on Ron's quill. We're set up for the "Roonil Waslib" name that we'll see later. Hermione comments that "...we're asked how we'd deal with dementors..." So, why do you think the essay is so hard? And why is Ron using the words "belligerent" and "augury"? Erm, I'm glad I looked this up. Augury is not the same as an Augerey, which is the direction I was heading. I know we discussed once before whether Snape had a different way of fighting Dementors than Lupin did, or if he had a different way of conjuring a Patronus. And of course, we won't discover whether Harry was right about the marks. Potioncat, just wondering From belviso at attglobal.net Tue Jan 3 16:22:29 2006 From: belviso at attglobal.net (sistermagpie) Date: Tue, 03 Jan 2006 16:22:29 -0000 Subject: Hobbsian worlds; Crime & Punishment/Re: CHAPDISC: HBP7, The Slug Club In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 145799 > BAW: > There is no evidence that Draco was in any way harmed by the > experience aside from a good fright and a bit of embarrassment. > And nobody ever died of either. Magpie: A good fright, embarassment and pain. There was no lasting physical damage, obviously, but Draco's state when it's over is that he is humiliated and in pain. I say that not to suggest that Draco is dreadfully injured, but because I think that is a clue that this is Barty Crouch, sadist, who had a hand in torturing people until they went insane. People do die from the kind of punishment Barty hands out. Crouch would probably happily kill Draco if he could get away with it. His crossing the line is explained away by people this way because they think he's Moody. The scene really isn't written as completely comic. Draco's being a ferret is funny, but to me Rowling doesn't seem to make anything funny about the ferret being smacked around, imo. The scene actually doesn't read like pure slapstick to me (the movie removes that element and, I think, therefore has Moody acting a bit more obviously crazy to make up for it). Snow: Now this is interesting LV has a job that doesn't require Draco to be qualified, hmmmmm. Apparently Draco was only initially informed, and he believed, that his requirement was to fix the vanishing cabinets thus the 'not being qualified' statement and the self-assured attitude from Draco. Magpie: I don't quite see why Draco's saying his job doesn't require him to be qualified means he didn't know he was supposed to kill Dumbledore. One doesn't have to be qualified to kill someone. CH3ed: Ron laughs upon hearing of Harry's suspicion because he is underestimating Draco. Harry isn't. Magpie: I tend to think this is also a case of Harry knowing Voldemort better. No one doubts that Harry is correct in saying Draco is up to something--that's made clear in chapter 6. They just don't think he can be up to something on the level he is. Harry not only can identify with the lengths to which someone his age might go (especially with for his father) but he knows (as everyone should) that Voldemort wouldn't treat someone all that differently because they were 16. I wonder if this is foreshadowed a bit in PoA where Draco is telling Harry how he would want to go after Sirius Black if it were his parents that got killed. Ron says Draco is just trying to get Harry to do something stupid, but I think there is a hint there that in some ways Harry and Malfoy have something in common. AHK wrote: "6. What is the composition of Neville's wand, and will it be important?" Magpie: Unicorn and cherry. Pure as the driven snow.:-) -m From amiabledorsai at yahoo.com Tue Jan 3 17:08:42 2006 From: amiabledorsai at yahoo.com (amiabledorsai) Date: Tue, 03 Jan 2006 17:08:42 -0000 Subject: Real child abuse In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 145800 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "horridporrid03" wrote: > Betsy Hp: > I'm really uncomfortable with that sort of philosophy. Rather than > using rules fairly applied to everybody, some rules are made for one > sort of person and other rules are made for another sort. Amiable Dorsai: But isn't that why the scene is so satisfying? The perception--ours, Harry's, Ron's, and especially Draco's--that there *are* two sets of rules: one for Malfoys and another for everyone else? If he did not feel himself above the rules that ordinary mortals must obey, would Draco have attacked Harry so publicly? And isn't Draco's comeuppance all the more sweet for that? The abuse Draco suffers as a ferret is not such a big deal physically--he's probably shaken off worse than that on the Quidditch pitch. The worst thing that happens to Draco that scene, I think, is the loss of his special status. When Crouch Junior says: "Well, I know your father of old, boy... . You tell him Moody's keeping a close eye on his son... you tell him that from me...." that had to hurt more than a few bounces off the flagstones. This scene is just another brick in the wall JKR's been building all along?the Wizarding World is a place of special privilege and rampant injustice?from the gross injustice meted out to Sirius and Stan Shunpike, to the pass that real Death Eaters like Lucius Malfoy get, to the petty prejudice that holds back Arthur Weasley's career. This may be one of the rabbits Jo is planning to pull out of her hat for book 7?-a reform (or the beginning of reform) of wizarding society in general. Amiable Dorsai From coverton at netscape.com Tue Jan 3 15:51:06 2006 From: coverton at netscape.com (Corey Overton) Date: Tue, 3 Jan 2006 09:51:06 -0600 Subject: RAB's identity and significance / SHIP: H/G / is Dumbledore dead? / Neville's significance In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <000501c6107d$88867f30$8a3887ac@Overton> No: HPFGUIDX 145801 Steph: I have some questions that I would like to ask. First, Who do you think is R.A.B that was mentioned in the 6th book and what significance does it have? Will solving this riddle put us closer to the answer of Harry Potter's prophecy? Also do you think that R.A.B is Regulus black? And what do we know of him so far? Do you think that the coupling is they way it should be? Also do you think Harry is a fool for giving ginny up? Do you think that Dumbledore is truly dead or just in some way waiting for a break to defeat Voldemort? Or do you think he's dead and that he will come back in some other form? Do you think that Neville will play anymore significance than he already has? Corey here: I think Dumbledore is dead and won't come back to help Harry. I believe he's helped him all he can wich is a great deal. As far as Harry being a fool for giving up Ginny. You know, I don't think he is. Remember Voldemort uses people that people are close to. Besides Harry has bigger fish to fry than a girlfriend. That can wait. While its a nice side story its not important at this point IMO of course. As far as far as RAB goes I think its Blacks brother who else could it be. And lets not for get He said he'd be dead before Voldemort read it. And he is. Your fellow list member, Corey From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Tue Jan 3 17:49:06 2006 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Tue, 03 Jan 2006 17:49:06 -0000 Subject: Snape again/Love and Vengeance/Ending In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 145802 Alla, responding to a SSSusan post from yesterday: > So, we do agree that despite the fact that Love will be the main > theme at the end, the bad guys ( whoever they are - here we differ > a bit :-)) will be punished, but probably not from Harry's hand. :-) > > Right? SSSusan: Yep, I think so. I believe Voldy for sure will be punished (and possibly by Harry) and that many of the DEs will be punished and that Snape *likely* will get some comeuppance, ***although*** with one big caveat. That caveat, not surprisingly, relates to your statement above concerning whoever those bad guys turn out to be. Because I am a DDM!Snaper, in my mind Snape's comeuppance may have already come in his taking DD's life. If he *is* DDM, and if his loyalty really does lie with the Order, and if I'm right that DD commanded/requested that Snape kill him, then casting that AK may have been the most painful, most difficult thing Snape's had to do in a long, long time, or ever. So, to me, if he proves out as DDM, then I'll be content with that as punishment enough for Snape. He had to kill the man he most admired, respected and perhaps loved? He had to lose the trust of all those in the Order? He had to flee Hogwarts? All because of how it *appeared* that he'd murdered DD because he wanted to. Yikes! That's painful. I know that that doesn't address the notion of *karmic* payback which Lupinlore explained more fully one time, that the payback or comeuppance should *associate* with the sin itself. IOW that the kind of comeuppance I describe in DD's killing wouldn't "fit" the "crime" of his treatment of Harry and Neville. I acknowledge that position, but I'm saying that for *me* if Snape turns out to be who & what I think he is, then his having had to kill DD would be sufficient enough pain for Snape to endure in *my* eyes. If I'm wrong about all that, and especially if I'm wrong about his being DDM, then I would agree that he needs a BIG comeuppance before the conclusion of the series. Siriusly Snapey Susan From foxmoth at qnet.com Tue Jan 3 17:50:17 2006 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Tue, 03 Jan 2006 17:50:17 -0000 Subject: CHAPDISC: HBP7, The Slug Club In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 145803 > Snow: > > > > Now this is interesting LV has a job that doesn't require Draco to be > qualified, hmmmmm. > > Apparently Draco was only initially informed, and he believed, that his > requirement was to fix the vanishing cabinets thus the 'not being qualified' > statement and the self-assured attitude from Draco. > > > > It would only follow that Draco Became aware what his true assignment was > (to attempt to kill DD) after the year had begun, say somewhere around the > time he was caught by Harry crying to none other than the muggleborn Moaning > Myrtle of all species. > > Pippin: Draco knew what was expected of him all along, I think. He certainly knew by the time of the first Hogsmeade visit when he tried to use the necklace. But he didn't think he needed NEWTs to use a deadly curse or fix the cabinet. I think Draco relished the idea that he had been chosen for his cleverness; that he might also have been chosen for his gullibility and as a punishment for his father's failure had not occurred to him. Naturally Narcissa was not in a position to tell him. I'm sure Draco was imagining a pitched battle like the one that had taken place in the Ministry, with plenty of gallant DE's for backup and curses flying everywhere, in which he would distinguish himself and completely erase his father's disgrace. No doubt Voldemort tired of flattering Draco; it was not necessary once Draco had committed himself by making the attempt with the necklace. LV could then use the threat of exposure along with the threat to Draco's family to keep his reluctant servant in line. Pippin From belviso at attglobal.net Tue Jan 3 18:02:40 2006 From: belviso at attglobal.net (sistermagpie) Date: Tue, 03 Jan 2006 18:02:40 -0000 Subject: Real child abuse In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 145804 > > Betsy Hp: > > I'm really uncomfortable with that sort of philosophy. Rather than > > using rules fairly applied to everybody, some rules are made for one > > sort of person and other rules are made for another sort. > > Amiable Dorsai: > But isn't that why the scene is so satisfying? The perception-- ours, > Harry's, Ron's, and especially Draco's--that there *are* two sets of > rules: one for Malfoys and another for everyone else? If he did not > feel himself above the rules that ordinary mortals must obey, would > Draco have attacked Harry so publicly? And isn't Draco's comeuppance > all the more sweet for that? Magpie: Err...well, yes as a supporter of Pureblood superiority Draco would support one rule for the "right sort" and one rule for everyone else, but I don't know where Harry and Ron would get the perception that Malfoy considers himself to have special rules for himself at school. Fanon!Draco may consider himself above mere mortals but canon!Draco has always been pretty much an ordinary student subject to detentions, punishments and rules. Snape certainly favors him personally, and later on he is a Prefect (which confers special priviledges) and a member of the IS (which gives him temporary powers over other students) but he doesn't usually have any sort of special status. He can always count on Snape to take a Slytherin's side, but nobody else in the school would do that. Malfoy would no doubt like to have special priviledges and tries to get away with stuff as much as he can, but I can't imagine why anyone in the school would see what Moody is doing as remarkable because nobody's ever dared discipline Malfoy before. McGonagall would have dragged him off by the ear, who knows how Hagrid would have reacted. Harry's probably found himself on the receiving end of more bended rules than Malfoy has under normal circumstances, to the casual observer. Usually Draco is specifically described as trying to avoid being caught doing something against the rules. He throws the hex openly at Harry here because angry and acting on impulse. Hexes thrown in the hallways aren't a rare thing in canon. -m From newbrigid at yahoo.com Tue Jan 3 17:29:53 2006 From: newbrigid at yahoo.com (Lia) Date: Tue, 03 Jan 2006 17:29:53 -0000 Subject: Musings and a Query: DD's Status, Snape's Allegiance, Harry's Heart and Fate... Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 145805 I will try to keep this, my fledgling post, concise. Musing One: Dumbledore's Status I believe--though I don't want to--that Dumbledore has indeed passed on. Still, I find it interesting that his Patronus is a phoenix. Moreover, I think back to other characters (Gandalf, Obi-wan) who either return and/or become more powerful after death. Valky may be correct in assuming that while Dumbledore's physical presence is gone, he himself is not. Musing Two: Snape's Allegiance I shan't debate whether or not Snape is truly evil or redeemable. It appear to me, though, that, whether he wanted to or not, Snape was bound to slay Dumbledore--for two reasons: first, he had made an Unbreakable Vow; second, it appeared (to me, at least) that Dumbledore asked him to do what he did. (I don't think that Dumbledore was pleading for his life.) Musing Three: Harry's Heart and Fate In preparing to post, I read all of the recent missives about vengeance. I agree that one who has purity of heart, which Harry does, cannot be truly vengeful. For instance, when trying to use Unforgiveables, Harry is not successful, a fact highlighted. I don't think that Harry can/will kill Voldemort. In fact, I'm not so sure he's supposed to do so. My own personal theory--subject to change--is that Harry will have to sacrifice himself somehow, and that his sacrifice--based upon LOVE, not hate, not vengeance--will thus lead to Voldemort's demise. (Lupinlore alluded to this, methinks.) Like Frodo in LOTR, Harry will save the WW (and that of us Muggles), but it won't be saved for him. Query: If RAB--Regulus or whomever--took and/or destroyed the Horcrux that Dumbeldore and Harry sought together, how was she/she able to dispose of the potion alone? Might another person have been there? I probably have tons of other questions, but I will search about before asking them, as they may have been answered already. Lia/newbrigid From fhsulisa at yahoo.com Tue Jan 3 17:46:24 2006 From: fhsulisa at yahoo.com (parcelmouthks) Date: Tue, 03 Jan 2006 17:46:24 -0000 Subject: Is Prophecy really about Neville? WAS:Re: RAB's identity and significance In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 145806 > Steph: > > > > Do you think that Neville will play anymore significance than > > he already has? > Amanda: I think the prophecy is really about Neville. But > like I said, these are just my opinions...lol. > Parcelmouthks: This is my first post. Bear with me. I think JKR answered the question about who the prophecy really is about on her website. See the FAQ's section. The question was - "What is the significance of Neville being the other boy to who the prophecy might have referred." JKR replies - "In effect, the prophecy gave Voldemort the choice of two candidates for his possible nemesis. In choosing which boy to murder, he was also (without realising it) choosing which boy to anoint as the Chosen One - to give him the tools not other wizard possessed - the scar and the ability it conferred, a magical window into Voldemort's mind". I love that website. From willsonkmom at msn.com Tue Jan 3 18:19:43 2006 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Tue, 03 Jan 2006 18:19:43 -0000 Subject: Malfoy, Snape and Slytherins (was Re: Real child abuse In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 145807 Sistermagpie wrote: >snip >Fanon!Draco may consider himself above mere mortals but > canon!Draco has always been pretty much an ordinary student subject > to detentions, punishments and rules. Snape certainly favors him > personally, and later on he is a Prefect (which confers special > priviledges) and a member of the IS (which gives him temporary > powers over other students) but he doesn't usually have any sort of > special status. He can always count on Snape to take a Slytherin's > side, but nobody else in the school would do that. Potioncat: In GoF when Draco first brings out the Potter Stinks badges, he does it behind Snape's back, and I think it's the same time that Pansy is laughing, also behind Snape's back. So while everyone knows Snape takes Slytherins' side, there appears to be some restraint used when Snape is around. I'm not sure which book it was, but in one case after Draco had messed up in a Quidditch game, he looked subdued, as if someone, teammates or Head of House, had taken him to task. Potioncat, going off to count posts. From coverton at netscape.com Tue Jan 3 16:52:58 2006 From: coverton at netscape.com (Corey Overton) Date: Tue, 3 Jan 2006 10:52:58 -0600 Subject: The Dursleys In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <000001c61086$2d04a8e0$8a3887ac@Overton> No: HPFGUIDX 145808 >lealess >I know children can ask if their friends >can stay over, but moving in to live somewhere for who knows how >long ... how can Harry, Ron or Hermione decide that without the >Dursleys' express invitation and acceptance? Did I miss something >(possible -- I don't have the book with me now). )? Orna: You are right and perhaps not: "We'll be there, Harry" said Ron "What?" "At your aunt and uncle's house" said Ron. "And then we'll go with you wherever you're going." Corey here : I agree with both of you to a point. To me Hermione isn't the type to just show up some place. But I can't wait to see what the Dursley's do when they see Ron and Hermione. Vernon will finally get to talk to the person who talked to him on the phone in POA. I mean they'll be in the same house. Somehow I can't see Hermione and Ron just ignoring them. And Hermione will help. Don't know how but she will. Your fellow list member, Corey saying buy for today. From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Tue Jan 3 18:26:41 2006 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Tue, 03 Jan 2006 18:26:41 -0000 Subject: First potions lesson/Stand aside girl and the end In-Reply-To: <20060103135423.33266.qmail@web86209.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 145809 Irene Mikhlin wrote: > He just asked him several questions, which were > covered in the textbook. Was it so horribly unfair to > expect Harry to know the answers? Alla: Yes, IMO it was, because IMO no homework was given to the first years prior to coming to Hogwarts. I would find it incredibly strange that especially muggleborns who had no exposure to magic would have been asked to do anything prior to listening to the initial instructions of the teachers. Besides, if I was sure that Snape expected Harry to KNOW the answers, I may have had a different feeling about this scene. I think that Snape asked Harry precisely because he expected Harry NOT KNOW the answers and wanted to see him humiliated, IMO. Irene Michlin: > "But he lives with Muggles!", you say. So what, so > does Hermione, yet she've read the book and knows the > answers. > "But it's unfair to use Hermione as a yardstick!", you > say. > Why? Because she is clever and enthusiastic about her > studies? That's the very definition of > Oustanding-level student, then. Oh, wait, that's the > only kind of a student Snape wants in his classes, > it's just he can't be selective before Year 6. Alla: Not because Harry lives with Muggles, although as I said sure I would expected a bit nicer welcome to the new world, but because I think that they were not given any homework yet, so there was no way that Harry COULD have known the answers, IMO of course. I think I said it in the past. I have not gone to college in USA ( I had attended six month program, but I don't count it as college education). I went basically straight to law school, so for all intent and purposes this was my first exposure to the american educational system. I did struggle A LOT with language and just with different substantive subjects. So I think I could identify with Harry in a sense that he faces the new world and new educational system. I have not gotten such a vicious "welcome" as Harry gets from Snape from ANY law school professor. Honestly, they had been ten times more understanding that I was basically in completely unknown world - education and everything else. And I take it law school professors supposed to be many times tougher that teachers in school, no? I would EXPECT law school professors to be tough, since they are dealing with adults and future lawyers And it is not like they went barking on the first lessons on the students who were native speakers either. So, no I think Snape was horrible on that lesson. As to Hermione - yes, I don't think it is fair to take her as an example, because she reads everything. If you could show me that ANY other student knew the answer, it would have been a different story to me. Besides, are you SURE that Snape wants students like Hermione in his class? It seems to me that he tells her to shut up all the time. > Jen: I figured it was probably common knowledge if she was working > at the MOM. We saw Bode on the lift and interacting with others in a > familiar way, so the DOM employees are not hidden away. Also, > Voldemort had spies in the Minstry. Alla: I don't know about common knowledge, since at least we heard that Love Room is supposed to be secret, no? Or my wires are crossed? But I will buy about Voldemort having spies in the Ministry. Thanks. > Jen: So I pictured the momentary worry or slight fear to be about his own > immortality experiments and perhaps a wonder if Lily knew something > he didn't. Maybe even something, which would interfere with his > experiments? Alla: Right, it makes sense to me if Voldemort wanted some kind of immortality related knowledge from Lily, but I think that after he would found that knowledge, he would have killed her later in any event. IMO of course > Jen: Harry of course would > not fall for anything having to do with dark arts or the like, but I > think he spelled his weakness out: "And if I meet Severus Snape > along the way....so much the better for me, so much the worse for > him (The White Tomb, p. 607 Bloomsbury) His hatred and need for > revenge can be easily manipulated by Voldemort and they counter the > love, which protects him from such manipulation. It just looked like > a perfect set-up to me, hearing about Dumbledore's explanation > followed by this intense interaction and increase in hatred for > Snape, a crack Voldemort can attempt to use against him. I call it > temptation, but perhaps other terms could be used. Or we might just > disagree this will happen . Alla: I am not sure yet if I disagree with you. :-) Let me ask you for some more clarification. You agree that Harry will not fall for Voldemort's "Join me Luc" kind of stuff, a la Star Wars, correct? :-) You are saying that Voldemort will try to manipulate Harry because of his hatred of Snape, right? Could you describe in more details how that would happen in your opinion? I am just not sure what Voldemort can do to Harry because Harry hates Snape, you know. Now, as I said I think that Harry will deal with his feelings about Snape, but I think it will occur independently without any relation to Voldemort and the only connection to Voldemort may happen when Snape will die for Harry or something like that. What can Voldemort do to Harry because Harry hates Snape? > Amiable Dorsai: > But isn't that why the scene is so satisfying? The perception-- ours, > Harry's, Ron's, and especially Draco's--that there *are* two sets of > rules: one for Malfoys and another for everyone else? If he did not > feel himself above the rules that ordinary mortals must obey, would > Draco have attacked Harry so publicly? And isn't Draco's comeuppance > all the more sweet for that? Alla: Oh, YES, YES. Just wanted to say it. Thanks. JMO, Alla From amanda_haffery at hotmail.com Tue Jan 3 14:07:49 2006 From: amanda_haffery at hotmail.com (Amanda Haffery) Date: Tue, 03 Jan 2006 14:07:49 +0000 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: CHAPDISC: HBP7, The Slug Club In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 145810 AHK wrote: > "3. Compare this train scene with the early train scene in OOP. How > do his feelings toward Neville and Luna compare in the two scenes? > What does this scene do for our understanding of the Harry in HBP?" Amanda: My feeling is that at the beginning he didn't know Luna or Neville too well. Along the way they've both proven to be (can't think of the word here lol) right up there on his list with Ron and Hermione and Ginny. He knows that no matter what, they'll be on his side. Anywhere he needs to be or whatever he needs to do, they'll be by his side. No questions asked. And I think now that he understands what happened to Neville's parents due to the DL he has a new appreciation for him. And he understands Neville's need to fight the DL becuase his parents can't any longer. AHK wrote: > "4. In this chapter, Harry spends time with people of two very > different rungs on the social ladder: the Slug Club -v- Neville and > Luna (whose lack of popularity is touched upon several times in this > chapter: Romilda's comments, DA being a source of Luna's only > friends, Neville's own grandmother's wish for Harry as a grandson > etc.). Discuss Harry's very different opinions of the two social > circles. What about Draco's perception of where he is on the social > ladder? (the attempt to impress that seemingly was trigger by being > snubbed by Slughorn, his relationship with Pansy who seems > determined to form some kind of attachment to him, etc.)" Amanda: I don't think Harry thinks in terms of a social ladder. These people have proven thereselves to him and for that they will always be most important to him. He doesn't care about money (as proved to the Weasley's time and again) he doesn't care about status. All he cares about is keeping his friends and the WW safe from Voldemort. I just think Draco is a prat which has been helped along by the way his family raised him. AHK wrote: > "5. Neville mentions that his wand may have been the last Ollivander > sold before he vanished. Do you think this is one of those throwaway > lines that will be significant later? How?" Amanda: I think Voldemort had him taken. I think certain people's wands together will create something that Voldemort thinks will destroy Harry. AHK wrote: > "6. What is the composition of Neville's wand, and will it be > important?" Amanda: Unicorn hair. And like I said before I think it will have some significance to other people's wands that will create something that Voldemort believes will destroy Harry. AHK wrote: > "9. The luncheon scene with Slughorn highlights the personality > traits that we glimpsed in "Horace Slughorn." Did this scene cement > your opinion of Slughorn, did it change your first impression from > the earlier chapter, or did your opinion undergo a transformation > later, say, after seeing the full horcrux memory?" Amanda: I felt from the beginning that Slughorn was a user and this just cemented my belief. He doesn't care about anyone or anything but his self and where people he meets can take him. AHK wrote: > "11. I find the end of this chapter difficult to read, wishing at an > emotional level that Harry would use more caution. Harry's > impulsiveness has gotten him into scrapes before, and he once again > takes a chance and loses. How do you think this tendency will play > out? (Curiosity killed the cat or caution makes cowards of us all?)" Amanda: Harry has never had to worry about someone before. No one's cared about him before. I think he's still trying to adjust to all the change that's come his way. He is putting people in danger with his antics but at the same time he's just trying to help. I think he holds himself responsible for everything that's happened to everyone because VM is after him and he just wants to be the one to handle it all so he can try to protect those he loves. Amanda From MercuryBlue144 at aol.com Tue Jan 3 18:17:27 2006 From: MercuryBlue144 at aol.com (mercurybluesmng) Date: Tue, 03 Jan 2006 18:17:27 -0000 Subject: Lily, Voldemort, AK and the atomic bomb analogy In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 145811 > Ceridwen: > Harry has 'inherited' some of LV's powers. What exactly > > went on with that AK at GH? Does it tie in with the horcruxes and > > the sign of their destruction? Or is there something else that makes > > his scar so significant? Navarro: > I do not think that Harry is a > horcrux because Voldemort wouldn't purposely try to kill his own soul, > even if it is only a small part of it. Voldemort's soul purpose seems > to be to cheat death, therefore I think he would do whatever possible > to maintain any horcruxes he has. MercuryBlue: But if Harry is a Horcrux, would Voldemort know? Possibly he would be aware that a Horcrux was created at Godric's Hollow, but if he does, it doesn't necessarily follow that he knows it is Harry. It's just as likely, from his view, that the Horcrux he created at Godric's Hollow is whatever object he brought there to make a Horcrux out of. And if he hasn't seen the object since Godric's Hollow, he wouldn't know for sure whether it's a Horcrux or not. Besides, we know Voldemort doesn't care about his soul (else he'd not rip it up). If he does know that Harry is a Horcrux, I think he'd rather have Harry dead and no longer a threat to him, with the unfortunate side effect of part of his soul dying with Harry, than have this particular Horcrux remain intact, with the unfortunate side effect of Harry remaining alive and posing a very real threat to Voldemort and his plans. He can always make more Horcruxes. From amanda_haffery at hotmail.com Tue Jan 3 14:14:36 2006 From: amanda_haffery at hotmail.com (Amanda Haffery) Date: Tue, 03 Jan 2006 14:14:36 +0000 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: The Dursleys In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 145812 Lealess: > Putting aside the comeuppance aspects of this discussion, the odd > thing to me is that the Dursleys are the adults in the house they > own, and Harry is the child and, more-or-less, a guest. The > Dursleys have apparently agreed to house Harry at Privet Drive. > Have the Dursleys invited Ron and Hermione to stay with them? > Isn't that what adults get to decide, not children? I know > children can ask if their friends can stay over, but moving in to > live somewhere for who knows how long ... how can Harry, Ron or > Hermione decide that without the Dursleys' express invitation and > acceptance? Did I miss something? Or is this just another example > of the magical world running over the Muggle world for its own > purposes (*if* Ron and Hermione stay at Privet Drive)? Amanda: Please don't take this as me saying that "parents" shouldn't be in charge...don't want people yelling at me lol. But when did the Dursleys ever care about Harry? They've always made him feel like slime for living there. They lied to him about his parents. They locked him in a cupboard. They fed him soup in a can once a day. Mr. Dursley would basically push Harry around. Harry's never been treated like a person until he went to the WW. And the only reason he found out how it was to be treated like a child and a person was because of the Weasleys and Hermione and the WW. The Dursleys abused Harry and that makes me feel that Harry has every right to use whatever he can to be in control when he's there. And I think that as Harry's surrogate "parents" they should be grateful to Harry's friends for keeping him safe therefore keeping the Dursleys safe. I feel Harry deserves an apology and should be given better treatment including letting his friends come and stay. It's not like they're allowed to use magic in the muggle world anyway. Unless it's an emergency. Those Dursleys need to show some compassion and be as fair to Harry as they are to Dudley. IMO Amanda From speedy_j_g at yahoo.de Tue Jan 3 15:32:29 2006 From: speedy_j_g at yahoo.de (speedy_j_g) Date: Tue, 03 Jan 2006 16:32:29 +0100 Subject: [HPforGrownups] First potions lesson In-Reply-To: <20060103135423.33266.qmail@web86209.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> References: <20060103135423.33266.qmail@web86209.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <43BA990D.4030900@yahoo.de> No: HPFGUIDX 145813 Irene Mikhlin wrote: > People make it sound as if Snape singled out Harry for attacking > him with Imperio five times in the row. Rabid dog indeed. > He just asked him several questions, which were covered in the > textbook. Was it so horribly unfair to expect Harry to know the > anwers? "But he lives with Muggles!", you say. So what, so does > Hermione, yet she've read the book and knows the answers. > I read this scene as Snape trying to make two points: > 1. I have very high standards here, come to the lessons prepared or > suffer. > 2. No special treatment for celebrities. Or you could see it as what it is...the continuation of a childish hate toward James Potter taken over to his son Harry James Potter. Everyone says James and Snape hated each other although Sirius and Snape hated each other even more. I don't know about you but I usually didn't prepare the next class if I didn't know what was covered and surely not before even having my first class in a new and unknown subject. As I see it Snape just couldn't see the differences between James and Harry. Nobody sees Harry as what he is, a boy, a young man if you want, who would give all his fame and money to have someone who cares about him and protects him. Harry never wanted his fame besides he just shared a look with Ron before Snape bore down on him. Snape just never let go of a unnamed grudge towards James and just took it over and placed it on Harry. speedy From finwitch at yahoo.com Tue Jan 3 19:10:00 2006 From: finwitch at yahoo.com (finwitch) Date: Tue, 03 Jan 2006 19:10:00 -0000 Subject: The Dursleys In-Reply-To: <000001c61086$2d04a8e0$8a3887ac@Overton> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 145814 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Corey Overton" wrote: > > > >lealess > >I know children can ask if their friends > >can stay over, but moving in to live somewhere for who knows how > >long ... how can Harry, Ron or Hermione decide that without the > >Dursleys' express invitation and acceptance > Corey here : > I agree with both of you to a point. To me Hermione isn't > the type to just show up some place. But I can't wait to see what the > Dursley's do when they see Ron and Hermione. Finwitch: Well, that is part of what I'm waiting for. Harry's to deal with the Dursleys - and it must be done before 31st July, of course. This will, hopefully, grant something related to Lily (from Petunia). She may not volunteer information, but there's always Veritaserum (Harry or Ron probably can't brew it, but I'm certain Hermione can if need be) and Legilimency. Harry *might* use that ability without meaning to. As for Hermione&Ron just going, not bothering to ask Dursleys - yes, well - I definately see Ron doing that. You know, the flying-car did not ask, and Ron 'we're coming no matter what they say' - and Harry says 'my godfather' to make Dursleys to let him go to QWC. Maybe we'll also learn what Dudders saw with Dementors-- I wonder what it was? And I definately like the idea of Vernon being the one who 'discovers magic late in life'. I wonder how the Ministry would react if it was Marge... After *deal with Dursleys* there will be Bill&Fleur's wedding. The event where, most naturally, we ought to meet Ron's relatives - like that Molly's second cousin and Arthur's brothers... I shall be waiting for that, too. And then there's a lot of Horcrux-hunt going on. I suppose Aberforth will come up - and I wonder about Albus Dumbledore's will. Finwitch From coverton at netscape.com Tue Jan 3 15:43:16 2006 From: coverton at netscape.com (Corey Overton) Date: Tue, 3 Jan 2006 09:43:16 -0600 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Mean is not abusive; Dudley; teaching; conservatism In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <000001c6107c$70c007a0$8a3887ac@Overton> No: HPFGUIDX 145815 Betsy Hp: Honestly, you can pull up example after example of Snape behaving badly. But, as Miles has said, being a scary, badly behaved, unfair teacher is not abuse. Alla: Yes, but if you interpret those examples as abuse, then they are. Miles: I described Harry's reactions to *real* abuse by Umbridge, and this is totally different to his reactions to Snape. BAW: Interesting that many of the people who seem to be most harshly critical of Snape's behavior towards Harry haven't said 'boo' about Umbridge. Even if we concede--which I do not for a moment --that Snape is an abuser, Umbridge is far worse. Lupinlore: I'm afraid trying to impose definitions, or even reach them by consensus, isn't going to work. It has never worked with the Dursleys, and I seriously doubt, in fact I'm certain, it will never work with Snape and his abusive behavior. BAW: What abusive behavior? Mean, yes. Unfair, yes. Harsh, yes. I have yet to see any time when he was abusive. Umbridge was abusive; the Dursleys were abusive. Snape is a meanie; however, it takes a great deal more than being a meanie to be an abuser. Corey: People, I think you all are missing a point of real abuse. How come no one for the life of me has cited what Gaunt did to poor Merope? I've only heard 1 list member agree with me on this topic. As far as Umbridge goes, well she's just flat evil. That quill of hers left ever lasting damage that Harry will neve get rid of. Yes, Snape is mean, unfair, and very sarcastic. But he gets the point across. IMO Neville is not afraid of Snape anymore. In HBP he doesn't come in contact with Neville that I can remember. Well hope that brought us to the larger point. Your fellow list member, Corey From foxmoth at qnet.com Tue Jan 3 19:40:51 2006 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Tue, 03 Jan 2006 19:40:51 -0000 Subject: "Stand aside, girl" and the End In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 145816 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "P J" wrote: > > PJ: > > Well, since Peter was the first to find Voldermort after escaping the > Shrieking Shack, I believe he was able to give LV much more than even Bertha > Jorgenson on a wide range of things that had happened since GH. He'd have > been present for family discussions and possibly even Order meetings! Who > watches what they say in front of their pets? > > Oddly enough though, none of the adults in the WW so much as mention this > potential disaster. > Pippin: The Weasleys weren't members of the Order in VW I. That brings up an interesting point. If Peter was always intending to scamper back to Voldemort when Voldemort grew strong again, why didn't he pick an Order family to spy on? He might have feared running into Lupin, I suppose, but in that case wouldn't he have abandoned Ron as soon as Lupin showed up in PoA? Kchuplis: Wow. Evil!Lupin. I certainly hope not. That would be a rather deflating and unfair thing to readers since nothing has ever pointed in that direction. Pippin: Nothing except: Peter's stellar incompetence as a spy (see above) Sirius's suspicion that Lupin was the spy Lupin's long, long history of putting his own interests and his loyalty to his peer group ahead of his allegiance to authority or his conscience his admission that this was cowardice his identification of the werewolves as his "equals" his grievance against Umbridge the intractable nature of the werewolf problem his withholding of information about Sirius, the Map, and his knowledge of an unguarded entrance into the castle from Dumbledore his attempt to kill Peter in cold blood his transformation just in time to help Peter escape before he could be questioned by Dumbledore Fenrir Greyback's ability to predict the time of his transformations well enough that he can position himself to attack specific victims (HBP ch 16) Lupin's ability to hide his thoughts from Snape His ability to tell what Harry and Sirius are thinking His ability to perform wandless and non-verbal magic His position just between Sirius and Harry at the moment when Sirius, ducking while on the dais, was struck "squarely in the chest" by a spell which must therefore have come from below and directly in front of Sirius Bella claiming credit only for fighting Sirius, not killing him, though we know from HBP that Voldemort did want him dead The existence of an unidentified Death Eater who "sent" the Lestranges to attack the Longbottoms per JKR's website. Bella would not take orders from Snape or Peter. JKR says all the major characters have been introduced. So who was it? Lupin is strangely like Quirrell -- always nearby or unaccounted for when something disastrous happens, and yet seemingly uninvolved. But he has motive, method and opportunity, and his history resembles very much that of real life radicals who get a liberal education courtesy of the ruling class, only to find that they are not equally welcome in the avenues of power or commerce. That situation has produced a lot more suicide bombers than Gandhis, unfortunately. Pippin From MercuryBlue144 at aol.com Tue Jan 3 18:44:09 2006 From: MercuryBlue144 at aol.com (mercurybluesmng) Date: Tue, 03 Jan 2006 18:44:09 -0000 Subject: 7 Horcruxes - Shock & outrage!! In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 145817 > scam: > > In OotP, the portraits tell that it is their bounden duty > > to serve the present Headmaster (or headmistress in this > > case), if she asks them for the info, she can get > > it. HP is DDM, but the portraits are there to serve her > > now. Wouldn't DD's portrait itself not tell her all she > > wants to know? > > Geoff: > (1) It may not have occurred to her to consult the portraits > since she was asking Harry who was standing directly and she > may well not be thinking straight at that moment due to her > distress. > > (2) I wonder whether some form of official confirmation > of her status would need to be made before the portraits could > be approached. MercuryBlue: Or maybe Dumbledore asked the portraits to keep their mouths shut. Dumbledore being a Headmaster, the portraits must obey. Which could backfire, I suppose, if the portraits aren't bound to obey past Headmasters. But if their loyalty to Dumbledore outweighs their obligation to McGonagall, or if Dumbledore's order/request stands till Dumbledore himself counters it, McGonagall wouldn't be able to learn anything from the portraits. From monalila662 at earthlink.net Tue Jan 3 20:23:43 2006 From: monalila662 at earthlink.net (lisa graves) Date: Tue, 03 Jan 2006 20:23:43 -0000 Subject: DD and Godric's Hollow (Long) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 145818 Brothergrip wrote wrote: > > As for the eye-witness, well the obvious candidate would be Snape. > But why did he not stop Voldemort murdering Lily/James. My wife's > theory is that it wasn't until that precise moment that Snape > switched sides (i.e. the murder of Lily). > > And finally (slightly unrelated), what was the object that Voldemort > had taken to Godric's Hollow to create the Horcrux? And where is it > now? > > OK, that is quite enough questions!! > > Happy New Year to all, > Brothergib Lisa here... This gives me an idea. (Although- I have to check the timeline, but I still think there may be something to the effect of RAB being with Voldemort at Godric Hollow hence he knew of the horcruxes and that's how the locket was seen in 12GP in OOTP) However, if it was the killing of Lily that somehow made snape switch sides... what do we know of Snape's mother... we are casually introduced to her in HBP, do we know if she is dead? if she was murdered? maybe if Snape was at Godric Hollow, perhaps seeing a mother die for her child hit a little too close to home as memories of his mother's (maybe) death came flooding into his snively brain. (sorry- not a snape fan, although I do believe he is on the good side). Just a thought. Lisa From ornawn at 013.net Tue Jan 3 20:42:52 2006 From: ornawn at 013.net (ornadv) Date: Tue, 03 Jan 2006 20:42:52 -0000 Subject: "Stand aside, girl" and the End Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 145819 >Alla: >Come to think of it, how do you think Voldemort came to know AT ALL >about what happened as result of Lily sacrifice and whatever magic >Dumbledore involved to protect Harry? It is not like Dumbledore gave >him a detailed report, right? :-) I think I am missing something >obvious here again. Sorry, I think I started rambling. Orna: I always assumed that since Riddle-horcrux interrogated Harry in CoS, Harry's answer somehow transpired into Voldemort's mind. It is a question, because it touches upon the issue of Voldemort's connection to his horcruxes. I can imagine, that somehow, when a horcrux gets near to acquire life and body, her "life-events" and thoughts connect somehow with the central soul piece in Voldemort. >La Gatta Lucianese: >And Ollivander has been hanging out with the Terrible Twins in >Diagon Alley, so when Voldemort points his wand at Harry and >shouts, "Avada Kedavra!", it turns into a rubber snake that >explodes in a shower of sparkes and a strong odor of dungbomb... >(I couldn't resist!) Orna: Love it! Couldn't resist either. But I'm afraid JKR is terribly serious on resolving this power-love issue. OTOH it could be a good lesson to Voldemort about the power of love ? since he places such enormous stress on magic, spells and super complicated inventions (7 horcruxes, special trophies, etc), it would be a good lesson for him to realize that just having lots of friends provides you with an unending potential to surprise your ever-so powerful enemy. Some of this issue had been dealt with against Umbridge ? but Voldemort is the real thing. Orna From ornawn at 013.net Tue Jan 3 20:59:52 2006 From: ornawn at 013.net (ornadv) Date: Tue, 03 Jan 2006 20:59:52 -0000 Subject: First potions lesson Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 145820 >Irene >People make it sound as if Snape singled out Harry for >attacking him with Imperio five times in the row. >Rabid dog indeed. >I read this scene as Snape trying to make two points: >1. I have very high standards here, come to the >lessons prepared or suffer. >2. No special treatment for celebrities. Orna: He wasn't just asking questions ? he sneered at Harry, as if he posed himself as a celebrity. He asked things ? he didn't tell pupils to study before ? OK, you may say that's the way he makes his point about the standard ? well there are some additional ways of making this point, without sneering at a student, IMO. Actually, he has special treatment for celebrities ? negative-way. OTOH - I can think, Snape, knowing Lily had some curiosity, whether Harry had natural potion-gifts or curiosity, or just his father's arrogance. He might even assume Harry had learned his mother was talented in potions, and therefore would have read the textbook in advance. He is not a nice person, Snape, but he might be just curious. As a matter of fact, Harry's non-reading anything between the time he learned about the WW, and his parents, and his arrival at Hogwarts is funny in a way. Hermione told him that she would have found everything she could. I think it has been mentioned, that even in HBP, when he meets Slughorn ? he listens to everything he tells him about his mother ? but refrains from asking questions. Actually, Snape, in his ever-so-irritating way - has a point. Orna From kmruddell at yahoo.com Tue Jan 3 20:10:02 2006 From: kmruddell at yahoo.com (katydid3626) Date: Tue, 03 Jan 2006 20:10:02 -0000 Subject: RAB's identity and significance / Sirius' father In-Reply-To: <000501c6107d$88867f30$8a3887ac@Overton> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 145821 > Steph: > Who do you think is R.A.B that was mentioned in the 6th book > and what significance does it have? Do you think that > R.A.B is Regulus Black? And what do we know of him so far? > katydid wrote: I have a question that has been bothering me for some time. What does anyone know about Sirius Blacks' father? We see mention of his mother and the portrait..but nothing at all about the father. Can anyone help? I have been unable to even find a name, as I thought he could perhaps be RAB. From h2so3f at yahoo.com Tue Jan 3 21:12:18 2006 From: h2so3f at yahoo.com (h2so3f) Date: Tue, 03 Jan 2006 21:12:18 -0000 Subject: "Stand aside, girl" and the End In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 145822 Alla wrote: "First of all, how did Voldemort find out that Lily worked in the Veil room or Love room, if she indeed did? Just asking for your speculations, of course. Snape or Peter or something else?" CH3ed: I don't think it had to be Snape or Peter or any of the OotP who ratted on Lily's work at the DoM. LV had a lot of spies inside the MoM, including Rookwood who works in the DoM itself, so it is likely LV knew most of what went on in MoM (as far as his spies knew, that is). Alla wrote: "Why would Voldemort find Lily studying death worrisome? Because he may think that she is ahead of him in his immortality quest or something like that and him killing her will not work? I am still not sure why he would not try though? He certainly tries to kill Dumbledore in the battle of MoM, no? I mean, I understand Voldemort finding Lily to be a powerful and worthy opponent, but if we are to believe Voldemort when he brags to his DE during Graveyard, didn't he figure out that Lily invoked ancient magic which he underestimated only after the fact? I don't know it just does not make sense to me that even if Voldemort WAS afraid of Lily or whatever she was studying of a great deal that he would not TRY to kill her. " CH3ed: I suspect LV wanted some information from Lily (if she was studying death, indeed). Maybe he wanted to know if she knew about Horcrux making and any limitations of its effectiveness? If 7 is truly the optimal number of horcruxes to have? Or whether there is any side effects of making them that LV didn't already know about yet? I think for the answers to those questions LV would be willing to keep her alive for a while (and then off her later once he has all the info that Lily could provide). Alla wrote: "How do you think Voldemort came to know AT ALL about what happened as result of Lily sacrifice and whatever magic Dumbledore involved to protect Harry? It is not like Dumbledore gave him a detailed report, right? :-) " CH3ed: I think LV have read about the effect of such a sacrifice before but had forgotten it by the time he attacked at GH (his 16 yrs old self even realized it when Harry told him what happened in CoS, so LV had read or heard of such magic by the time he was 16). The real LV would have realized what he forgot when the rebounded AK ripped him from his body. And then that was confirmed when LV/Quirrell couldn't touch Harry in PS/SS. :O) orna wrote: "If Voldemort felt some fear about Lily ? he would kill her. If he wanted to use her, I think he would spare her ? but I'm not sure this way "Stand aside, silly girl" is so dismissive, that I can't connect it with some great interest in her." CH3ed: I think it would make more sense if you assume that there is another person there with LV(so LV would try to be non-challant about Lily because he likes to be seen as superior to all others... the ego thing). Orna wrote: "What's the meaning of locking love in a room? I find this picture quite intriguing. What are the dangers of it?" CH3ed: It is intriguing indeed!! There are many kinds of love though. As Slug mentioned it when he was describing the love potion in his class. Harry is great with brotherly love (which I think we can't have too much of), but obsessive and jealous love is downright dangerous (it makes you do things you wouldn't normally do). Love...a two-edged sword with an appealing name. It would take some special personality to be able to work with it without getting too affected by it, I guess. ;O) CH3ed :O) From mac68 at rochester.rr.com Tue Jan 3 18:23:42 2006 From: mac68 at rochester.rr.com (Maureen) Date: Tue, 3 Jan 2006 13:23:42 -0500 Subject: Musings and a Query: DD's Status, Snape's Allegiance, Harry's Heart and Fate... In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <000401c61092$d3781610$640fa8c0@gold> No: HPFGUIDX 145823 Lia: > Musing One: Dumbledore's Status > I find it interesting that his Patronus is a phoenix. > Moreover, I think back to other characters (Gandalf, Obi-wan) > who either return and/or become more powerful after death. > Valky may be correct in assuming that while Dumbledore's > physical presence is gone, he himself is not. > > Musing Two: Snape's Allegiance > It appear to me, though, that, whether he wanted to or > not, Snape was bound to slay Dumbledore--for two reasons: > first, he had made an Unbreakable Vow; second, it appeared (to > me, at least) that Dumbledore asked him to do what he did. > > Musing Three: Harry's Heart and Fate > one who has purity of heart, which Harry does, cannot > be truly vengeful. For instance, when trying to use > Unforgiveables, Harry is not successful, a fact highlighted. > I don't think that Harry can/will kill Voldemort. I'm > not so sure he's supposed to do so. My own personal theory > is that Harry will have to sacrifice himself somehow, > and that his sacrifice--based upon LOVE, not hate, not > vengeance--will thus lead to Voldemort's demise. > > Query: > If RAB--Regulus or whomever--took and/or destroyed the Horcrux > that Dumbeldore and Harry sought together, how was she/she able > to dispose of the potion alone? Might another person have been > there? Hi Lia, This is my first post with this group. I agree with your Musings. We were actually discussing last night the connection to Dumbledore and the phoenix. I believe that there is something more to that than meets the eye. The fact that Harry mentions seeing the phoenix shape at DD's funeral leads me to believe we have not heard the last of him. I have never considered the fact that Harry would not be the one to kill LV. Being full of love and compassion may prevent him from actually doing the deed. I wonder if Snape might actually do the killing. Snape has already shown that he can kill and there may be resentment there towards LV who he may blame for him having to kill DD. If Regulus was alone he might have known what LV had set up there and was prepared to counteract it. Knowing what it was may have provided him the ability to take some sort of potion before taking it. It might be that LV had Regulus along to do some dirty work not considering him worthy or smart enough to figure what he was doing. Once the horcrux was gone LV would have easily known who did it. I think that Sirius may have underestimated his brother and that we will find out more about him or his actions in the next book. Maureen From gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk Tue Jan 3 21:17:51 2006 From: gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk (Geoff Bannister) Date: Tue, 03 Jan 2006 21:17:51 -0000 Subject: First potions lesson In-Reply-To: <20060103135423.33266.qmail@web86209.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 145824 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Irene Mikhlin wrote: Irene: > People make it sound as if Snape singled out Harry for > attacking him with Imperio five times in the row. > Rabid dog indeed. > > He just asked him several questions, which were > covered in the textbook. Was it so horribly unfair to > expect Harry to know the anwers? > "But he lives with Muggles!", you say. So what, so > does Hermione, yet she've read the book and knows the > answers. > "But it's unfair to use Hermione as a yardstick!", you > say. > Why? Because she is clever and enthusiastic about her > studies? That's the very definition of > Oustanding-level student, then. Oh, wait, that's the > only kind of a student Snape wants in his classes, > it's just he can't be selective before Year 6. > > I read this scene as Snape trying to make two points: > 1. I have very high standards here, come to the > lessons prepared or suffer. > 2. No special treatment for celebrities. Geoff: I'm afraid I don't read it in this way. This is no way to treat a class - or especially a single pupil - on their first encounter. Hermione is not a suitable yardstick. Even the other pupils consider her to be a swot - a know-it-all. Even so, she has her hand up to answer the questions and is completely cold-shouldered by Snape who concentrates on demolishing any shred of confidence Harry might have in a new and unsettling environment. He then continues to "have a go" at Neville and subsequently blames Harry for Neville's mishap. This will never inspire any confidence in Harry or any of the other pupils who happen to get in the way of his tongue. I had a Woodwork master just like this when I first went to Grammar school at the age of 11. I have been a dead loss at the subject ever since because I became too scared to attempt to do even the simplest activity with a woodworking tool..... From bawilson at citynet.net Tue Jan 3 21:12:54 2006 From: bawilson at citynet.net (bawilson at citynet.net) Date: Tue, 3 Jan 2006 16:12:54 -0500 (EST) Subject: Voldemort vs. Tom Message-ID: <7352783.1136322774329.JavaMail.administrator@webmail> No: HPFGUIDX 145825 Gerry: "What we've seen of Tom Riddle is that even at eleven he was a little jerk who stole, killed pets and traumatized children younger than he himself. Young Tom was a thouroughly rotten human being and certainly not someone Harry could ever call a friend. LV reversing back in age will still result in a rotten power-hungry person." True; but one young enough to change and heal. Had Dumbledore taken a more proactive mentoring approach to Tom, he might not have turned to the Dark Side. BAW From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Tue Jan 3 21:53:56 2006 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Tue, 03 Jan 2006 21:53:56 -0000 Subject: "Stand aside, girl" and the End In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 145826 Jen Reese wrote: Now that JKR has given us a better picture of the way Voldemort thinks and his particular obsessions and patterns, the idea that Voldemort would save Lily because Snape (or anyone) asked him to doesn't fit for me. Carol responds: I totally agree, except that I never thought Voldemort was "saving Lily for anybody. > > Jen Reese: > > The second most common suggestion is that Voldemort thought Lily too silly to bother with since his laser focus was on killing James and Harry. Alla responded: > > Yes, on this one I am with you. I don't buy it at all. Carol notes: I do, with a slight difference in interpretation. I think that Voldemort was focused on killing Harry, the Prophecy Boy who posed a real threat. James "had" to die only because he was an armed opponent; LV's warped sense of honor and dignity (see his observance of the formalities of duelling in the graveyard scene in GoF) demanded that he allow James to "fight manfully" (quoting from memory here) before killing him. But since LV is a Legilimens and thinks nothing of using the Avada Kedavra Curse when he's had enough or the opponent seems to pose a real threat, James never had a chance. Lily, however, was not armed and did not offer to fight. She was only, quite literally, standing in LV's way, "foolishly" blocking his path to his intended target. Once James had been dispensed with and Harry was in view, LV's focus was entirely on the only person he perceived as a real threat, Harry. Lily could have survived if she hadn't refused to move. That was her choice. My evidence? LV has never expressed anything but contempt for Lily ("Move aside, silly girl!" "Your Muggle mother," etc.). Granted, had she resisted him as James did, he would have had to relinquish this view and duel her, and he no doubt would have found his contempt misplaced, but ultimately he would have killed her as he killed James and then murdered Harry--and so much for the WW and the HP series! But Lily's courage showed itself in a way he didn't comprehend and dismissed as "silly"--the courage to sacrifice herself for love and in so doing unwittingly defeat Voldemort (wonder if that was her third defiance, and James's as well?). More evidence: LV's treatment of Lily has a precedent in Tom Riddle's treatment of the boy Hagrid in the diary memory in CoS, where his real target is Aragog. Obviously he couldn't AK Hagrid and still be a "hero," but he could have used Stupefy or Petrificus Totalis. Inside, he orders him to stand aside, exactly as he orders Lily to stand aside at GoF: "'Stand aside,' said Riddle, drawing out his wand" (CoS Am. ed., 247). Seems like a pretty clear precedent to me. At any rate, I see no need for fancy theories explaining Voldemort's motivation, which is explained by the need to kill Harry and the lack of need for killing Lily. Which is not to say that Lily didn't work at the MoM and that her work didn't play some role in saving Harry. I used to think that she put some sort of protective Charm on Harry that was activated by her self-sacrifice, but JKR's website seems to nix that idea. Still, I believe that her knowledge of Charms and her association with Love will prove important in Book 7. I just don't think it has any direct bearing on why Voldemort told Lily to stand aside. Alla wrote: > Now, I agree with you that he will discover power of Love in himself fully and his forgiveness of Snape will somehow play into it, but I doubt that it will be connected with Voldemort tempting Harry to come to the Dark side. :-) IMO of course. Carol responds: Hey, Alla, we agree on this one! Does that mean we must be right? Carol, hoping that we *are*. From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Tue Jan 3 22:10:08 2006 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Tue, 03 Jan 2006 22:10:08 -0000 Subject: DD and Godric's Hollow (Long) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 145827 Brothergib: > After Voldemort's demise, we know that Harry was found in the > rubble by Hagrid. Does this mean that DD never visited Godric's > Hollow after Voldemort's defeat? If he had, he would surely not > have left Harry in the rubble! > So where did DD disappear to from the time when Voldemort was > defeated, to the moment he finally arrived at Privet Drive? SSSusan: Ahem. Jen, Potioncat, Kaylee, other crewmates on the DRIBBLE SHADOWS* -- 'tis tooting our own horn time! ;-) IOW, time to resurrect our theory of what happened in the "missing 24 hours." Some of us believe that DD may have used that time to "shore up" the protections on Harry, not believing Voldy to be fully gone for all time. It's my contention that DD, Hagrid & Snape worked together to apply a protective potion/ointment containing dragon blood onto baby Harry during those 24 hours. If you're interested, here's where it starts, and there are several follow-ups & responses: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/128717 Brothergib: > Sirius (who is not at Hogwarts) also receives this information and > rushes off to Godric's Hollow. SSSusan: I think that Sirius realized something was wrong because he was supposed to have met up with PP, who did not show. In my version of things, Sirius dashed off to GH to see if everything was alright and just *happened* upon the awful scene, as opposed to having been officially informed about it by DD or someone else. Siriusly Snapey Susan, cap'n of the not especially sea-worthy but still floatin', I think, DRIBBLE SHADOWS *Dragon's Resistance In Blood Bestows Life-saving Effects: Snape, Hagrid And Dumbledore's Ointment Was Supplement From gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk Tue Jan 3 22:21:29 2006 From: gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk (Geoff Bannister) Date: Tue, 03 Jan 2006 22:21:29 -0000 Subject: Moralising and preaching/Loose ends in Book 7 Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 145828 I think this may depend on how you interpret moralising and sermonising. We often draw comparisons with "The Lord of the Rings" and the Narnia books. In these stories, here and there are occasions when folk have suggested that Tolkien and Lewis were guilty of doing just this in their works. In the case of Lewis, it is probably true because he made it clear that he intended "The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe" to be an allegory of the Christian way to faith. If someone has a strong faith, then that is going to permeate and influence what they do and think and it will probably show itself in their writing unless they make a great effort to mask it or write from an opposite point of view for effect. It depends, as I said, as to how far you consider writing from your own world view and letting that underpin your fiction constitutes moralising and sermonising. Tolkien makes his points very subtly but if you look closely enough ? not only in LOTR but in other books like "The Silmarillion" ? you can see where he is coming from and what moral absolutes drive his characters. Through Harry's eyes, we are made to examine people's motives and hence decide whether they are basically good or bad ? not that they are angels or the opposite but what set of moral absolutes they use as their springboard. The great thing about the books is that most of the characters are like us. They give a mix of responses to what happens: sometimes measured; sometimes angry; sometimes sad; sometimes self-centred and sometimes altruistic. And that is how we are ? or at least I am. As a Christian, I believe that I should be aspiring to the greater good and to walk in the way that Christ would have me go ? but do I all the time? No way. My motives are often questionable and in this I find myself to identify with Harry and the others, even poor little rich kid Draco who finds himself at a moral crossroads with his upbringing and his own conscience pulling in opposite directions. How the mechanics of how Harry brings down Voldemort I will leave to JKR to show but it often the case that tyrants are removed by people who do not do it for vengeance but because they truly believe that the world will be a better place without that person in place. Taking the 1944 Stauffenberg bomb plot against Hitler as an example, I believe that the group plotted against him because they realised the immense damage he was inflicting on not only the Allies but on his own country. Perhaps there was a selfish element present but they believed it would be for the future good of the world. We see this as part of Harry's nature quite early: `"I'm going out of here tonight and I'm going to try to get to the Stone first." "You're mad!" said Ron. "You can't!" said Hermione. "After what McGonagall and Snape have said? You'll be expelled!" "SO WHAT?" Harry shouted. "Don't you understand? If Snape gets hold of the Stone, Voldemort's coming back! Haven't you heard what it was like when he was trying to take over? There won't be any Hogwarts to get expelled from! He flatten it or turn it into a school for the Dark Arts! Losing points doesn't matter any more, can't you see? D'you think he'll leave you and your families alone if Gryffindor win the House Cup? If I get caught before I can get to the Stone, well, I'll have to go back to the Dursleys and wait for Voldemort to find me there. It's only dying a bit later than I would have done because I'm never going over to the Dark Side! I'm going through that trapdoor tonight and nothing you two say is going to stop me! Voldemort killed my parents, remember?"' (PS "Through the Trapdoor" pp.196-97 UK edition) Although there is a hint of wanting to get revenge at the end, Harry's thrust is much more the need to stop Voldemort and he takes a very moral stance at this point. The idealism of youth? Maybe. But it is what the Wizarding World needs. If I may move briefly to another issue which has been raised, namely that of tying up loose ends in Book 7. I do not expect JKR to do this completely because in real life and also in fiction loose ends often remain. To take a real life example, I moved from London to the West Country 11 years or so ago. My wife and I often wonder what happened in certain situations: `Did A and B finally get divorced?'; `I wonder where C's daughter is working now?'; "Whatever became of Mrs. D?' and so on. I could cite a page full of real loose ends which have remained unravelled through my life. So with fiction. Taking, as I did earlier, LOTR and Narnia, both the authors leave some loose ends. Within the LOTR books, we do not fully know what happened to Gimli, Legolas, Aragorn or the other hobbits in the canon of the story. OK, Tolkien did provide Appendices in which brief references are made, usually to who they married or what family they had but other parts of their lives remain shrouded in the mists of the Fourth Age. Even in Narnia, there is at least one loose end. When, in "The Last Battle", Tirian asks Peter: `"Sir" said Tirian, when he had greeted all these. "If I have read the chronicle aright, there should be another. Has not your Majesty two sisters? Where is Queen Susan?" "My sister Susan," answered Peter shortly and gravely, "is no longer a friend of Narnia."' (The Last Battle, "Through the stable door") We are told little other than she seems to have fallen into the pattern of teenage girls of her day. Why she has decided that Narnia is a thing of childhood, we are not told. And there are other loose ends in other author's books; one which comes to mind is the ending of Daphne du Maurier's novel "My Cousin Rachel" where we are left wondering what to make of the eponymous lady and her motives and we never know. So, if Jo Rowling leaves a few loose ends around, it will be no worse than real life or what other writers have done. For answers, you can probably consult the fanfic sites. :-) From amiabledorsai at yahoo.com Tue Jan 3 22:32:14 2006 From: amiabledorsai at yahoo.com (amiabledorsai) Date: Tue, 03 Jan 2006 22:32:14 -0000 Subject: Real child abuse In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 145829 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "sistermagpie" wrote: Amiable Dorsai: But isn't that why the scene is so satisfying? The perception-- ours, Harry's, Ron's, and especially Draco's--that there *are* two sets of rules: one for Malfoys and another for everyone else? If he did not feel himself above the rules that ordinary mortals must obey, would Draco have attacked Harry so publicly? And isn't Draco's comeuppance all the more sweet for that? Magpie: Err...well, yes as a supporter of Pureblood superiority Draco would support one rule for the "right sort" and one rule for everyone else, but I don't know where Harry and Ron would get the perception that Malfoy considers himself to have special rules for himself at school Amiable Dorsai: No, save for Snape's apparent inability to detect Draco's infractions, but Draco's whole approach to life is one of demanding special entitlement for himself, and of pouting (or worse) when he doesn't get it. >From Harry's first meeting with him in Madame Malkin's (where Draco introduces Harry to Pureblood snobbery), to the very scene in question, (the ferret incident) Draco attitude has been that Draco, and his family, and the "right sort" of Purebloods, are something special?for example, the ferret incident was precipitated when Draco attempted to hex Harry in the back after Harry returned an insult to the Burrow and to Mrs. Weasley with an insult to Narcissa. Draco, in other words, may insult Harry's honorary mother at leisure, but Draco's mom is sacrosanct. There is a special satisfaction in seeing an attitude like that earn its just reward. Amiable Dorsai From miles at martinbraeutigam.de Tue Jan 3 22:41:43 2006 From: miles at martinbraeutigam.de (Miles) Date: Tue, 3 Jan 2006 23:41:43 +0100 Subject: Musings and a Query: Harry's Heart and Fate... References: <000401c61092$d3781610$640fa8c0@gold> Message-ID: <018701c610b6$dfcacce0$14b2a8c0@rechnerchen> No: HPFGUIDX 145830 Welcome Maureen! Maureen wrote: > I have never considered the fact that Harry would not be the > one to kill LV. Being full of love and compassion may prevent > him from actually doing the deed. I wonder if Snape might > actually do the killing. Snape has already shown that he can > kill and there may be resentment there towards LV who he may > blame for him having to kill DD. Miles: My impression is, that noone will actually kill LV. He will be dead in the end, but I do not see anyone casting an Avada Kedavra on him (especially not Harry). But we should recall the prophecy: "The one with the power to vanquish the Dark Lord approaches. (...) and either must die at the hand of the other for neither can live while the other survives" (OotP, ch 37) Native speakers around, please correct me if I tell something stupid now. The wording of the prophecy is... strange. Many people tend to read that The Chosen will kill Voldemort or the other way round. But that's not what it says. First, the word "kill" is not in the prophecy. LV or Harry will die, because they cannot live when the other survives. But it says "either must die at the hand of the other", and this can become true in many ways, literally, or figuratively. Just think of a wrestling Harry and Voldemort tumbling through the veil... ok, JKR surely could do better ;). Another interesting word is "vanquish", the prophecy does not speak of "to kill". Again the call for native speakers, but if I read my dictionaries correctly, then the usage of "to vanquish" is connected to power, to mastery, to overcoming, and not so much to killing or wiping out. So, the prophecy *seems* to speak of The Chosen One to kill The Dark Lord, but somehow it avoids to use the word "killing" or a synonyme. I do think that JKR wrote it this way intentionally. Miles From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Tue Jan 3 23:15:11 2006 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Tue, 03 Jan 2006 23:15:11 -0000 Subject: Potion in the Cave: Did Bellatrix hide it there? In-Reply-To: <20060102101941.1628.qmail@web33511.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 145831 Gopal wrote: > I have seen many emails that mention the potion in the > cave is Voldemort's potion/ memories/ dark magic. How > is Harry to continue in the quest for the horcrux? > > We can think of two different possibilities on the > cave horcrux. > > 1) Voldemort placed the horcrux there himself (seems > like the kinda thing LV would do). R.A.B found out the > location and took the horcrux much like Dumbledore-Harry. > > 2) Voldemort asked R.A.B to put the horcrux in the > cave and R.A.B did everything else but put the horcrux > there. > > In either case, LV would not know the horcrux to be > missing unless a) he checked the cave or b) someone > with R.A.B spilled the beans. > > In scenario 1), the potion would be filled by R.A.B > with the intent to 'kill'/damage LV and was not meant > for Dumbledore-Harry. This is again because the potion > did not fill itself after Dumbledore consumed it. If > it was RAB's potion then it would be 100% poisonous > and going by AD's reaction it probably was. > > In scenario 2), the potion can be LV's dark magic. > Given that horcrux is a precious thing to LV, lesser > probability that 2) would be true. Carol responds: I don't quite follow your logic. Voldemort would have no reason to remove his own Horcrux unless he thought it was in danger of being discovered. The potion (which I agree is a kind of poisoned memory, appropriately colored a venomous green like Nagini and the blinding flash of an AK) would be there as a deterrent to anyone (not specifically Dumbledore) who got past the other magical protections (with the water and the Inferi as further protections against anyone who succeeded in removing from the pensievelike bowl) to prevent it from being taken from the cave once it was retrieved. If, as most of us suspect, the locket we glimpsed at 12 GP in OoP is the real Horcrux, there's at least one remaining protection: It's sealed shut. There may be a curse like the one on the ring to punish the person who destroys it as well. Given all that, I see no reason to doubt that either Voldemort or someone he trusted (Bellatrix?) placed the locket in the cave along with the protective potion/poisoned memory. The person doing so would be in no danger since he or she would be hiding and protecting the Horcrux, not trying to retrieve it or use it. (It doesn't need to be "used": as long as it exists and has not been opened, it serves its purpose, which is to guarantee LV's immortality by keeping a portion of LV's soul safely hidden outside his body.) The locket could have been placed in the cave by Voldemort himself soon after it was made (after the murder of Hepzibah Smith but before LV applied for the DADA position). Or it could have been moved from its original hiding place after LV heard the Prophecy and sensed danger to himself for the first time since his return. It could have been placed there by Voldemort himself or by one of his few trusted followers, surely not R.A.B. if R.A.B. is Regulus (a kid younger than Severus Snape, who was about twenty at the time of the Prophecy). Since R.A.B. was able to find it, I'm guessing that it was someone other than LV, say one of the second-generation DEs like Bellatrix ("In the past he has trusted me with his most precious--"), following LV's instructions. (Dumbledore recognizes the Inferi and the blood "sacrifice" necessary for entering the cave as reflecting Voldemort's "style" of magical protection, his own fear of death attributed to any would-be Horcrux thieves.) I very much doubt that it was R.A.B.'s potion specifically intended for LV, or that LV knew the Horcrux had been taken. The note was there in case he or his henchmen tried to move it again. (R.A.B. probably didn't know that the "pensieve" would refill itself when he placed the fake Horcrux in it, but he would guess that LV would know how to undo or bypass his own magic if it did.) R.A.B. (Regulus?) wasn't trying to poison LV; he was taunting him ("Ha!ha! I've discovered your secret and you're mortal now.") The problem with this thinking is that R.A.B. didn't have the opportunity (or, apparently, the ability) to destroy the Horcrux, and, in any case, it was only one of six. I don't think your list includes all the possibilities. Here's an alternative scenario for people to shoot down: After hearing the Prophecy and realizing that the mere existence of his Horcruxes is not sufficient to guarantee his immortality, Voldemort assigns the fanatically loyal Bellatrix the task of hiding his locket, giving her the exact location of the cave and directions to follow in hiding it and providing her with the potion/memory to place in the pensievelike bowl, which for the sake of simplicity we'll assume is already in the cave. To impress on her the importance of her mission, he actually entrusts Bellatrix with the secret that it's a Horcrux (though not that it's one of six). Bellatrix, feeling both honored by this assignment but afraid that she can't do it alone (and well aware of the consequences of failure), borrows her dear aunt's devoted house-elf, Kreacher (whom we know to be devoted to "Miss Bellatrix"), to help her with her task. (Regulus overhears this request.) Trusting entirely to Kreacher's loyalty and not crediting him with intelligence equal to a human's, she lets slip that the thing she's hiding is a Horcrux. Already having been Crucio'd for refusing to torture or kill a Muggle (or some similar assignment) and knowing that his days are numbered, Regulus is determined to defy Voldemort by thwarting Bellatrix's mission. He questions Kreacher about his excursion and discovers that Bellatrix has hidden a locket in a cave and that she refers to the locket as a Horcrux. After discovering what a Horcrux is (if he doesn't know already), Regulus writes the note to LV, buys a locket superficially similar to the one Kreacher describes, and then orders Kreacher to take him to the cave. The boat takes them both across to the island, not sensing the presence of Kreacher (as other posters have already speculated). Regulus orders Kreacher to drink the poisoned memory/potion (which addles his brains permanently), substitutes the locket with the note inside for the Horcrux, and returns home with the Horcrux, which he, being barely a fully qualified wizard and not particularly skilled at curse-breaking, is unable to open and consequently destroy. A short time later, he defies the DEs by refusing to perform an Unforgiveable Curse (or whatever) and is murdered, perhaps by his own dear cousin Bellatrix. Meanwhile, the pensievelike bowl, sensing a locket inside it and unable to detect the substitution, fills up again, renewing its magical protection for the fake Horcrux, and the real Horcrux remains in 12 GP until Sirius tries to throw it out and its retrieved by Kreacher (or Mundungus steals it). This scenario (I'm not calling it a theory yet) would explain how Bellatrix knew that LV wasn't dead when he was vaporized at Godric's Hollow and how Regulus could know about the locket Horcrux and where to find it. It also ties in with Kreacher's devotion to Bellatrix, with her words to Snape about being trusted with LV's "most precious" secrets or missions, and with Kreacher's all-too-evident insanity. Holes in the theory, anybody? Or improvements, if you like it but see a flaw or two (like the pensievelike bowl already being in the cave)? Carol, hoping that someone will see it as at least plausible From katmac at katmac.cncdsl.com Tue Jan 3 23:27:37 2006 From: katmac at katmac.cncdsl.com (lagattalucianese) Date: Tue, 03 Jan 2006 23:27:37 -0000 Subject: RAB's identity and significance / SHIP: H/G / is Dumbledore dead? / Neville' In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 145832 > ... > > Valky: > Neville definitely has a significant role to play in book seven. > > Some thoughts on this, there is a pattern based on Alchemy, in which > Neville's significance has been two times out of three connected with > an orb shaped object. ie the Rememberall and the Prophecy Orb. If > there is anything to this pattern then it is certain that Nevilles > very significant role in Book Seven will involve an orb shaped thing. > Any Ideas? > > Valky > La Gatta Lucianese: What an interesting observation! The Russian bogeyman Koschei the Deathless was, in fact, deathless because he stored his soul in a magical egg, which he then kept very well hidden. If the egg was destroyed, he would die. Perhaps JKR, who has admitted to a love of folklore, draws on this story; the last (?) Horcrux is something egg-shaped or orb-shaped (the Ravenclaw Horcrux?), and Neville is instrumental in helping Harry to destroy it and destroy Voldemort. This would have the (to me at least) satisfying effect of giving the "spare" prophecy boy something significant to do in the last book. Though I still think that it is going to be Neville who rescues Snape, thus returning good for ill, and perhaps redeems him at the same time. From a_svirn at yahoo.com Tue Jan 3 23:39:13 2006 From: a_svirn at yahoo.com (a_svirn) Date: Tue, 03 Jan 2006 23:39:13 -0000 Subject: CHAPDISC: HBP7, The Slug Club In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 145833 > Potioncat: > Well, it's just now dawned on me that Blaise's mother may have killed > 6 men. The book doesn't say that of course....I really should go read > that section before commenting. And we shouldn't forget the presumption of innocence too! Take Bess of Hardwick, for instance. According to Walpole, Four times the nuptial bed she warmed, And every time so well performed That when death spoilt each husband's billing He left the widow every shilling. Of course seven dead husbands look a bit more suspicious than four. The last three must have been intrepid to the point of recklessness (Gryffindors, perhaps?) a_svirn (sorry, if I misquoted Walpole inadvertently) From katmac at katmac.cncdsl.com Wed Jan 4 00:06:31 2006 From: katmac at katmac.cncdsl.com (lagattalucianese) Date: Wed, 04 Jan 2006 00:06:31 -0000 Subject: RAB's identity and significance / SHIP: H/G / is Dumbledore dead? / Neville's significance In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 145834 > > Amanda: > Ok here's my theory. I do think it's Regulus Black. I think he's > going to be sent back as part of the prophecy to either throw > Harry off his game with Voldemort or he's going to come back to > help Harry defeat the dark lord. I also think Harry was a huge > fool to give up Ginny. Hopefully he realizes it in the new book. > I'm thinking that in the new book, all the people that died are > going to be able to somehow help Harry defeat Voldemort...DD and > Sirius included. I don't think they'll actually be alive so much > as a force. I think the prophecy is really about Neville. But > like I said, these are just my opinions...lol. > La Gatta Lucianese: (1) I never got the impression that Harry "broke up" with Ginny in the sense that he told her he didn't love her. He broke off a *close* relationship with her *for her own safely* and made that very clear to her ("...He'll try and get to me through you.... How do you think I'd feel if this were your funeral...and it was my fault?...") Ginny's final take is, "I never really gave up on you. Not really.... Maybe that's why I like you so much." Which certainly doesn't sound like the relationship is on the rocks; just on hold until Harry gets the dangerous stuff out of the way. (2) Probably in much the same way Cedric and Harry's parents came back to help him in GoF. Which raises a third interesting question... (3) The manifestations that come out of Voldemort's wand in GoF: Are they true ghosts, or just memories stored in the wand of people Voldemort has previously killed with it? On the one hand, they behave like data-storage items (interesting that Voldemort has a LIFO wand-- with the exception of Lily, and JKR puts that down to sleep deprivation--;D), and they can only remain "embodied", if that is indeed what they are, while the wands are connected; but on the other hand, they express a good deal of independence and hostility to Voldemort, and do, in fact, manage to remain in existence for a brief time after the connection is broken, while Harry makes his escape. I think Harry talks about this with somebody (Dumbledore?), but I don't recall what the conclusion, if any, was. From amiabledorsai at yahoo.com Wed Jan 4 00:24:25 2006 From: amiabledorsai at yahoo.com (amiabledorsai) Date: Wed, 04 Jan 2006 00:24:25 -0000 Subject: "Stand aside, girl" and the End In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 145835 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "pippin_999" wrote: Pippin: His ability to perform wandless and non-verbal magic His position just between Sirius and Harry at the moment when Sirius, ducking while on the dais, was struck "squarely in the chest" by a spell which must therefore have come from below and directly in front of Sirius Amiable Dorsai: And what a powerfully useful addition to Voldemort's ranks Remus must be! Imagine having the cool nerve, the incredible aim, and the split second timing needed to hex Sirius from a distance--with a spell that leaves a visible trail between the caster and the target--in front of Harry, Neville, Dumbledore and Kingsley, (I think that completes the list of good guys, saving Sirius himself, who were conscious at the time) and not have any of them notice! Wandlessly! I may become a Death Eater myself in tribute to his magnificence. Amiable Dorsai From belviso at attglobal.net Tue Jan 3 23:59:25 2006 From: belviso at attglobal.net (Magpie) Date: Tue, 3 Jan 2006 18:59:25 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Real child abuse References: Message-ID: <00ed01c610c1$ba848f60$b836400c@Spot> No: HPFGUIDX 145836 Potioncat: In GoF when Draco first brings out the Potter Stinks badges, he does it behind Snape's back, and I think it's the same time that Pansy is laughing, also behind Snape's back. So while everyone knows Snape takes Slytherins' side, there appears to be some restraint used when Snape is around. I'm not sure which book it was, but in one case after Draco had messed up in a Quidditch game, he looked subdued, as if someone, teammates or Head of House, had taken him to task. Magpie: Oh sure. Snape has complete control in his class. And Draco gets criticized or punished plenty of times. When he claims to have some special position he usually doesn't. Amiable Dorsai: >From Harry's first meeting with him in Madame Malkin's (where Draco introduces Harry to Pureblood snobbery), to the very scene in question, (the ferret incident) Draco attitude has been that Draco, and his family, and the "right sort" of Purebloods, are something special-for example, the ferret incident was precipitated when Draco attempted to hex Harry in the back after Harry returned an insult to the Burrow and to Mrs. Weasley with an insult to Narcissa. Draco, in other words, may insult Harry's honorary mother at leisure, but Draco's mom is sacrosanct. Magpie: But Draco and Snape both seem to think that *Harry* walks through life with a sense of entitlement and gets special treatment, which is why they get a special satisfaction in seeing him get smacked down--and occasionally the school seems to agree with their pov on this rather than Harry's. Harry thinks Draco and his family and his house are the wrong sort. Harry's insulting Narcissa doesn't make him any less angry when Draco insults his mother. They've got more things in common than they think. -m From iam.kemper at gmail.com Wed Jan 4 01:24:47 2006 From: iam.kemper at gmail.com (Kemper) Date: Tue, 3 Jan 2006 17:24:47 -0800 Subject: Loving the Dark Lord was Re: [HPforGrownups] Hobbsian worlds; Crime & Punishment Message-ID: <700201d40601031724s183b4ax4bce730f23062228@mail.gmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 145837 On 1/2/06, Bruce Alan Wilson wrote: > > elfundeb: > "Instead, I think Harry will discover that the key to vanquishing > Voldemort is love, exemplified by mercy. Voldemort will understand > that he is wholly dependent on Harry's mercy. And Harry, being > pure in heart, will grant it." > > BAW: > Harry can't love Voldemort; nobody can love Voldemort. But, he > CAN love Tom Riddle. I have written and posted here a little > scene in which Harry appeals to what is left of Tom underneath > the Voldemort persona. It ends with the Order finding Harry > embracing a weeping young man, who--if his eyes were not swollen > shut, his nose all puffy, and his face covered with snot and > tears--would have been quite handsome. Harry says to them, > "Voldemort is no more. But I'd like to introduce you to my new > friend--Tommy Riddle." . . Kemper now: I agree with elfundeb. Mercy is a kind of love. Maybe it's a agape's sibling. I don't know. But I do know that showing love takes on many guises. You show love to your partner differently than you show love to your enemy. One is romantic while the other is merciful. Mercy doesn't look like goo-goo eyes, doesn't sound like sweet nothings, doesn't feel like tender touches, doesn't smell like a bouquet of roses. Mercy is compassion which is love. In OoP, Voldemort coiled away from Harry show of love for someone else (Sirius). Voldemort was on the fringes of that love and he had to get away. Imagine how love (mercy) will affect Voldemort when the full force of Harry's love (mercy) is upon him. Mercy will be the water that melts Rowling's wicked witch. Kemper [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From AllieS426 at aol.com Wed Jan 4 01:41:14 2006 From: AllieS426 at aol.com (allies426) Date: Wed, 04 Jan 2006 01:41:14 -0000 Subject: The Dursleys In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 145838 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Steve" wrote: > The Dursleys will just have to get over it. > > Still you do bring up a good point. I don't see the Dursleys accepting > this graciously. How will Harry convince them to let Ron and Hermione > stay? Will he simply say, 'They are staying and that is IT!'? Will he > try to reason and explain? I should be an interesting first few chapters. > Allie: "Uncle Vernon, Aunt Petunia, 2 of my friends are coming to stay here. They are coming for a few days to help me pack up all of my belongings. [Allie interjects that this would not take very long.] As soon as I turn 17, we will leave and you will never see me again." I think if Harry presented it in that way, the Dursleys would be so happy to be rid of him that they would go along with it. Once before Vernon had been willing to do something for Harry (was it sign a permisson slip?) if it meant Harry would be out of the house. From whiggrrl at erols.com Wed Jan 4 01:03:47 2006 From: whiggrrl at erols.com (j. lutz) Date: Tue, 03 Jan 2006 20:03:47 -0500 Subject: Neville in Book 7 (Was: Re: Hobbsian worlds; Crime & Punishment/Re: CHAPDISC: HBP7, The Slug Club) In-Reply-To: <1136314546.1858.94000.m33@yahoogroups.com> References: <1136314546.1858.94000.m33@yahoogroups.com> Message-ID: <43BB1EF3.9060907@erols.com> No: HPFGUIDX 145839 >AHK wrote: >"6. What is the composition of Neville's wand, and will it be >important?" > >Magpie: >Unicorn and cherry. Pure as the driven snow.:-) > The unicorn hair does recall Voldemort drinking unicorn blood in /Philosopher's Stone/, and Cedric's wand in /Goblet of Fire/ -- virtuous and doomed. However, Bard Woodcrafts (http://bardwood.com/) describes cherry wood as "[e]specially suited to invocations and blessings of sacred fires, spells of finding, hunting, conflict, war, competition, sex, passion, communion with animals, unification of groups or tribes, and the amplification of magical will." I wouldn't mind seeing Book 7-Neville live up to these associations, but it would be a suspiciously big change from his role in the previous books. Especially because JKR in /Half-Blood Prince/ did *not* show Neville dramatically improving now that he has his own wand. Should we be looking at this as a dog that conspiciously did not bark? Another detail from /HBP/ that I'd like to see play out in Book 7: Does Ron's joke about "the hag, the Healer, and the /Mimbulus mimbletonia/" (p. 468, U.S. hardback edition) foreshadow a recovery by the Longbottoms? Ron has a history of making jokes that tend to come to pass in some form. j.lunatic From miles at martinbraeutigam.de Wed Jan 4 02:02:19 2006 From: miles at martinbraeutigam.de (Miles) Date: Wed, 4 Jan 2006 03:02:19 +0100 Subject: Moralising and preaching/Loose ends in Book 7 References: Message-ID: <01d701c610d2$e5971c20$14b2a8c0@rechnerchen> No: HPFGUIDX 145840 Geoff Bannister wrote: > If someone has a strong faith, then that is going to permeate and > influence what they do and think and it will probably show itself in > their writing unless they make a great effort to mask it or write > from an opposite point of view for effect. It depends, as I said, as > to how far you consider writing from your own world view and letting > that underpin your fiction constitutes moralising and sermonising. Miles: I agree, that it is quite impossible for an author to keep his own faith, ethical convictions a.s.o. out of his work. Maybe if s/he tries to do, but why should an author want it? But really, this is not the same like preaching. Rowling deals with morals, with very basic ethical principals, so we will learn about her own fundament. I think it will become most important for the final showdown as discussed before, and Rowling's Christian faith will be important, as she herself told us. But I do not expect preaches in the final book, just people who choose forgiveness or revenge, love or hate... Geoff Bannister wrote: > I find myself to identify with Harry and the > others, even poor little rich kid Draco who finds himself at a moral > crossroads with his upbringing and his own conscience pulling in > opposite directions. Miles: And here's the difference between a preeching author and a good one, if you ask me. The message is there, but it is shown in shades of gray. There is no Saint Potter, there is no Devil Draco. And no Devil Snape ;). Geoff Bannister wrote: > Although there is a hint of wanting to get revenge at the end, > Harry's thrust is much more the need to stop Voldemort and he takes a > very moral stance at this point. The idealism of youth? Maybe. But it > is what the Wizarding World needs. Miles: The last discussion in HBP between Harry and DD about Harry's mission is interesting here. DD seems to lead Harry towards revenge, hatred, and killing. If my understanding of Harry's mission is right, then DD is either wrong here, misunderstanding the prophecy, or misleading/manipulating Harry to make him find his own way later and on his own. Geoff Bannister wrote: > To take a real life example, > I moved from London to the West Country 11 years or so ago. > I could cite a page > full of real loose ends which have remained unravelled through my > life. > So with fiction. > So, if Jo Rowling leaves a few loose ends around, it will be no worse > than real life or what other writers have done. For answers, you can > probably consult the fanfic sites. :-) Miles: I disagree with this. Yes, obviously it is not possible not to leave some loose ends in a series like Harry Potter, or in Lord of the Rings. If the authors would try to unravel or interweave all loose ends, the end of their books would be pretty boring. But I don't think that we can compare it to real life. Fiction is Fiction, so it is inventend from the first to the last word. All the threads an author brings into his universe should have a purpose (even if they are only decoration), but the main threads should have an end that at least relates to the other ends. If they are not, I doubt a series like Harry Potter could be good literature. This is not a short story. Miles From amanda_haffery at hotmail.com Tue Jan 3 21:39:29 2006 From: amanda_haffery at hotmail.com (Amanda Haffery) Date: Tue, 03 Jan 2006 21:39:29 +0000 Subject: First potions lesson In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 145841 >Irene: > He [Snape] just asked him [Harry] several questions, which > were covered in the textbook. Was it so horribly unfair to > expect Harry to know the anwers? > "But he lives with Muggles!", you say. So what, so > does Hermione, yet she've read the book and knows the > answers. > "But it's unfair to use Hermione as a yardstick!", you > say. Why? Because she is clever and enthusiastic about her > studies? > > I read this scene as Snape trying to make two points: > 1. I have very high standards here, come to the lessons > prepared or suffer. > 2. No special treatment for celebrities. Amanda: Just to make a point...didn't Hermione know for years before starting at Hogwarts that she was a witch? Unlike Harry who found out a month before he was to begin schooling. Therefore, Hermione was way ahead of Harry in the reading, requirements and spells. Snape was out to get Harry before Harry ever arrived and all because of what happened years ago with James. He's taking out the sins of the father on the son and that's unfair. From kking0731 at gmail.com Wed Jan 4 02:10:42 2006 From: kking0731 at gmail.com (Kathy King) Date: Tue, 3 Jan 2006 21:10:42 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: CHAPDISC: HBP7, The Slug Club In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 145842 Pippin: Draco knew what was expected of him all along, I think. He certainly knew by the time of the first Hogsmeade visit when he tried to use the necklace. But he didn't think he needed NEWTs to use a deadly curse or fix the cabinet. I think Draco relished the idea that he had been chosen for his cleverness; that he might also have been chosen for his gullibility and as a punishment for his father's failure had not occurred to him. Naturally Narcissa was not in a position to tell him. I'm sure Draco was imagining a pitched battle like the one that had taken place in the Ministry, with plenty of gallant DE's for backup and curses flying everywhere, in which he would distinguish himself and completely erase his father's disgrace. No doubt Voldemort tired of flattering Draco; it was not necessary once Draco had committed himself by making the attempt with the necklace. LV could then use the threat of exposure along with the threat to Draco's family to keep his reluctant servant in line. Snow: You very well could be correct, I simply found the qualification aspect puzzling as far as Draco's attitude on the train. Draco just doesn't appear (at that point) to be boasting about taking down one of the greatest wizards that ever lived without any qualifications to do so. Malfoy states: "Maybe the job he wants me to do isn't something that you need to be qualified for?" If the job were to kill Dumbledore, I would think even Malfoy would realize he wasn't qualified for the task. I don't think Malfoy was speaking of that particular undertaking at that time. I don't think Draco realized that it was he 'alone' that was expected to take down Dumbledore?at least at that point. I believe it wasn't until Draco finally found out that 'he alone' was to take on this mission himself that the Dark Lord threatened him with his parent's lives. When exactly this took place would be up for grabs, but the Moaning Myrtle scene is fairly close I would think. I'm sure Narcissa told her son that Snape promised her that he would help Draco but Draco's attitude towards Snape on the Tower showed that Draco felt threatened by Snape and felt that he would receive all the glory for His endeavors. It simply does not reflect Draco realizing the truth in that respect for me. Narcissa was not supposed to talk to anyone but she (in my opinion) let Snape in on what Draco was truly to do. What, then would stop her from allowing her son the same courtesy, to protect him? In the end, I just don't see Draco being so cocky on the train about what he was unqualified but expected to do. Snow [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From babyhrndz at yahoo.com Tue Jan 3 23:24:30 2006 From: babyhrndz at yahoo.com (Amanda Shoffner) Date: Tue, 3 Jan 2006 15:24:30 -0800 (PST) Subject: Musings and a Query: Harry's Heart and Fate... In-Reply-To: <018701c610b6$dfcacce0$14b2a8c0@rechnerchen> Message-ID: <20060103232430.92136.qmail@web30802.mail.mud.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 145843 Maureen wrote: > I have never considered the fact that Harry would not be the > one to kill LV. Miles: > My impression is, that no one will actually kill LV. He will > be dead in the end, but I do not see anyone casting an Avada > Kedavra on him (especially not Harry). > > But we should recall the prophecy: > > "The one with the power to vanquish the Dark Lord approaches. > (...) and either must die at the hand of the other for neither > can live while the other survives" (OotP, ch 37)... > Many people tend to read that The Chosen will kill Voldemort > or the other way round. But that's not what it says. First, > the word "kill" is not in the prophecy. LV or Harry will die, > because they cannot live when the other survives. But it says > "either must die at the hand of the other", and this can > become true in many ways, literally, or figuratively. Another > interesting word is "vanquish", the prophecy does not speak > of "to kill". Again the call for native speakers, but if I > read my dictionaries correctly, then the usage of "to vanquish" > is connected to power, to mastery, to overcoming, and not so > much to killing or wiping out. Amanda: Miles, I agree with your thoughts strongly. IMO, I have thoughts as to whether LV did the AK on Harry when he was a baby, or "marked him as an equal" by making Harry a horcrux. I had this thought when thinking of how HP has dreams of what LV is doing, his 'mark' hurts when LV has strong emotions. Their wands are of the same feather. If Harry succeeds in finding all horcruxes and is indeed the last horcrux, if he dies, LV dies. LV wants to kill HP, and he would not want to harm any of his horcrux's unless he was so full of himself to think that all others were safe and that nobody would realize LV even had any. With that in mind, he may be under the impression that he could spare the one placed in HP...again, all an IMO. Then again, as I agree you pointing out, OotP, Ch 37: "One can not live while the other survives". This states *One* can not live while the other survives, we know the LV can't stand the fact that HP is alive because it caused his downfall, and so wants to kill HP. So if read literal, and LV is the one who can't survive with HP alive, then Harry *can* survive with the idea that LV is still alive, as long as LV's 'powers' were not a threat to anyone anymore. Two completely different theories as to the meaning of the prophecy, let me know what you think. IMO, I think the connection with LV and HP may get a lot stronger than perceived. Amanda From babyhrndz at yahoo.com Wed Jan 4 01:16:14 2006 From: babyhrndz at yahoo.com (Amanda Shoffner) Date: Tue, 3 Jan 2006 17:16:14 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Voldemort vs. Tom In-Reply-To: <7352783.1136322774329.JavaMail.administrator@webmail> Message-ID: <20060104011614.76134.qmail@web30813.mail.mud.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 145844 Gerry: "What we've seen of Tom Riddle is that even at eleven he was a little jerk who stole, killed pets and traumatized children younger than he himself. Young Tom was a thoroughly rotten human being and certainly not someone Harry could ever call a friend." BAW: >True; but one young enough to change and heal. Had Dumbledore >taken a more proactive mentoring approach to Tom, he might not >have turned to the Dark Side. Amanda: IMO, when Tom realized the kind of person after that first meeting DD was, I believe that he hid the LV side of him. He was making plans all throughout his years at Hogwarts and he realized after that first encounter at the orphanage with DD that DD would reprimand him for wrong doings, as again pointed out in CoS when Tom placed blame on Hagrid so as to not thwart his plans of becoming LV. ~Amanda From hartsonthemove at yahoo.com Wed Jan 4 02:20:51 2006 From: hartsonthemove at yahoo.com (Kathy) Date: Wed, 04 Jan 2006 02:20:51 -0000 Subject: First potions lesson In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 145845 >> Orna: > I can think, Snape, knowing Lily had some curiosity, whether > Harry had natural potion-gifts or curiosity, or just his > father's arrogance. He might even assume Harry had learned > his mother was talented in potions, and therefore would have > read the textbook in advance. > As a matter of fact, Harry's non-reading anything between the > time he learned about the WW, and his parents, and his arrival > at Hogwarts is funny in a way. Hermione told him that she > would have found everything she could. Hermione has a family dynamic that ALLOWS her to read and possibly encourages her to read and be the best witch possible once she receives her owl announcing her acceptance to Hogwarts. Harry, on the other hand, does NOT have that same home environment. How on earth can you possibly think that after all the hullabaloo over the owls and letters that Vernon would ever allow him to crack a single book of that "dreadful" subject???? "hartsonthemove" From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Wed Jan 4 03:14:32 2006 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Wed, 04 Jan 2006 03:14:32 -0000 Subject: Real child abuse/ESE!lupin questions In-Reply-To: <00ed01c610c1$ba848f60$b836400c@Spot> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 145846 > Magpie: > > But Draco and Snape both seem to think that *Harry* walks through life with > a sense of entitlement and gets special treatment, which is why they get a > special satisfaction in seeing him get smacked down--and occasionally the > school seems to agree with their pov on this rather than Harry's. Harry > thinks Draco and his family and his house are the wrong sort. Harry's > insulting Narcissa doesn't make him any less angry when Draco insults his > mother. Alla: I cannot speak for Amiable Dorsai of course, but I see very little similarity between Snape and Draco thinking that Harry gets a special treatment, entitlement, etc, AND readers like me getting a satisfaction out of reading about Draco's ego being smacked down. Why? Because I don't see a support in the text to Snape and Draco's POV, on the contrary IMO narrator emphasizes all the time that Harry does NOT want his fame, has NO sense of entitlement, would give it all up to have a real family, would give his money to Weasleys in a twinkle of an eye, etc. So, the way I see it, Draco and Snape may think along those lines as much as they would like, but I see that they are wrong, while when I read about Draco, I see exactly what Amiable Dorsai described - the boy thinking that he is above everybody else and THAT is IMO supported in the text as well. When school turns on Harry, we also see that they are wrong - Harry is NOT a Slytherin Heir, Harry did NOT put his name in Goblet of Fire, etc,etc, etc. That is why Draco being put in his place is very satisfactory to me, because IMO he needs to be put in his place and IMO we KNOW from being in Harry's head that he does NOT have a huge ego and does not need to be put in his place. I just realized something actually. There is one more reason why I enjoy "ferrets scene" so much, besides it being example of the humor I really like. I think others pointed it out - I don't see Draco being excessively injured in that scene. Oh, sure, we can imagine him being battered and bruised, etc, but I don't see it, so I do not see him suffering a tad more than he deserves. I think, not sure, but I think that I would not want Draco to get through Umbridge detentions. That I think would have been a bit much even for me. Hmmmm, does it mean that I don't hate him that much? Nah, I just think that this would have been pure example of abuse without being funny and I don't want to read about it even if Draco is the main character in the scene, a bit too painful. But let me stress again, I enjoy "ferret scene" DESPITE it being wrong, really, would not want to explain myself again on the same topic. :-) >> Pippin: > Nothing except: > Sirius's suspicion that Lupin was the spy Alla: Right, OK the majority of the reasons you brought up I think are simply plot related reasons or I have some very fundamental meta disagreements with them, so I won't even talk about them, but I wish you would clarify some of them. Such as this one - Lupin also suspected that Sirius was a spy, right? Do you categorize Sirius as one of DE also? Pippin: > his identification of the werewolves as his "equals" Alla: And they are not? No, seriously how does this point out to Lupin's hidden allegiance? Pippin: > his grievance against Umbridge Alla: Same question here. Pippin: > the intractable nature of the werewolf problem Alla: Sorry, don't have my dictionary handy. Is intractable a synonym to incurable? If yes, do you mean that Lupin went to Voldemort hoping that Voldemort will cure him or do you mean something different? Pippin: > The existence of an unidentified Death Eater who "sent" the > Lestranges to attack the Longbottoms per JKR's website. > Bella would not take orders from Snape or Peter. JKR says all > the major characters have been introduced. So who was it? Alla: Oh, I am sure that we will know the person. My money is on Snape of course. My question will be how do you know that Bella won't take Orders from Snape? Do you have any indication of Bella and Snape relationship during those years? It seems to me that even now, Bella completely bought Snape as trusted second in command and we SEE that all DE treat Snape on the Tower with great deference. I think that even if now Bella does not feel great deference to Snape, I think it is a big possibility that she felt it back there. But even if she did not, it is not necessarily a given, IMO, although I could be wrong, that Bella was the one in charge of the little group who went to torture Longbottoms. JMO, Alla From fuzzlebub85 at aol.com Wed Jan 4 03:19:45 2006 From: fuzzlebub85 at aol.com (fuzzlebub85 at aol.com) Date: Tue, 3 Jan 2006 22:19:45 EST Subject: TBAY: Re: DD and Godric's Hollow (Long) Draught of Living Death, DD&Snape in HBP Message-ID: <1f0.4a2a563a.30ec98d1@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 145847 Kaylee Tonks-Lupin here answering her Captain's call! Kaylee Tonks-Lupin is strolling along the beach of Theory Bay, when she sees Brothergib standing on the shore. He looks rather lost. She walks up to Brothergib and politely asks, "May I help you?" He nods. Brothergib: > So where did DD disappear to from the time when Voldemort was > defeated, to the moment he finally arrived at Privet Drive? Kaylee smiles. "Why, I believe I hear my Captain calling!" Indeed, Susan's voice can be clearly heard: SSSusan: Ahem. Jen, Potioncat, Kaylee, other crewmates on the DRIBBLE SHADOWS -- 'tis tooting our own horn time! ;-) Kaylee grins. "Come on, Brothergib! I'll show you the best idea I've seen yet!" She grabs Brothergib's hand and pulls him toward the DRIBBLE SHADOWS. When they reach the deck, she lets Captain SSSusan explain further: SSSusan: IOW, time to resurrect our theory of what happened in the "missing 24 hours." Some of us believe that DD may have used that time to "shore up" the protections on Harry, not believing Voldy to be fully gone for all time. It's my contention that DD, Hagrid & Snape worked together to apply a protective potion/ointment containing dragon blood onto baby Harry during those 24 hours. If you're interested, here's where it starts, and there are several follow-ups & responses: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/128717 Brothergib: > Sirius (who is not at Hogwarts) also receives this information and > rushes off to Godric's Hollow. SSSusan: I think that Sirius realized something was wrong because he was supposed to have met up with PP, who did not show. In my version of things, Sirius dashed off to GH to see if everything was alright and just *happened* upon the awful scene, as opposed to having been officially informed about it by DD or someone else. Kaylee nods. "It makes a lot of sense," she says breathlessly, giving her Captain an almost worshipful look. "Rule number one: The captain is always right! Oh wait, that's Captain Amber's rule...well, it can be Captain Susan's too," she decides. "Anyway, Brothergib, Dragon's Resistance In Blood Bestows Life-saving Effects: Snape, Hagrid And Dumbledore's Ointment Was Supplement is what it stands for. I know some people probably don't believe Snape would make the ointment after...after HBP," she admits, lowering her eyes for a moment of silence. "But I believe there's still the issue of why Snape was trusted by Dumbledore. That all fits in here. And..." Kaylee lowered her voice. "Here. I'll need the relevant canon in HBP...bad me, I know, not having the book on hand..." Kaylee blushed. "Brothergib, Captain Sue, perhaps Jen, Potioncat...someone?" she begs. "I know that Draughts of the Living Death ought to be important. I'm sure Snape brewed one for Dumbledore. He had to have." She has a wild, almost hysterical look in her eyes. "Snape can't be evil! He just can't! Dumbledore isn't dead!" She throws herself into the sand and beats her fists on her beach towel, howling in pain, anger, and denial. Kaylee knew she'd gotten way off topic, but it had to be said. ~Kaylee Tonks-Lupin, apologizing profusely to the Elves Siriusly Snapey Susan, cap'n of the not especially sea-worthy but still floatin', I think, DRIBBLE SHADOWS [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From juli17 at aol.com Wed Jan 4 03:24:21 2006 From: juli17 at aol.com (juli17 at aol.com) Date: Tue, 3 Jan 2006 22:24:21 EST Subject: "Stand aside, girl" and the End Message-ID: <192.4f307d04.30ec99e5@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 145848 Carol wrote: At any rate, I see no need for fancy theories explaining Voldemort's motivation, which is explained by the need to kill Harry and the lack of need for killing Lily. Julie: I agree that the most straight-forward explanation for Voldemort offering Lily her life is that he was focused on Harry and contemptuous of her abilities. But I still wonder why JKR made a point of the fact that Voldemort has never offered to spare anyone else's life. Cedric, for instance, was no threat whatsoever, but Voldemort killed him simply because it was expedient. At Godric's Hollow it would have been more expedient to kill Lily immediately rather than wasting additional seconds telling her to stand aside. Which makes me suspect there is still some unknown reason Voldemort spent even that minimal amount of time offering Lily her life. Alla wrote: > Now, I agree with you that he will discover power of Love in himself fully and his forgiveness of Snape will somehow play into it, but I doubt that it will be connected with Voldemort tempting Harry to come to the Dark side. :-) IMO of course. Carol responds: Hey, Alla, we agree on this one! Does that mean we must be right? Julie: I don't think it must be Voldemort per se tempting Harry to come to the "Dark" side. The Dark side is easy, because it would take no effort for Harry to give into his hatred and thirst for vengeance. Choosing to do the right thing over the easy thing is always harder, as Dumbledore told Harry. If Harry holds on to his hatred and thirst for vengeance, and is unable to fully use his greatest power, Love, Voldemort may well be able to defeat him. And, yes, if Voldemort realizes Harry's darker impulses weaken his power, including those impulses to exact vengeance on Snape, then he would certainly use that against Harry if he could. The real question is whether Voldemort can actually understand the source of Harry's power, and thus attempt to thwart it. Julie [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From AllieS426 at aol.com Wed Jan 4 03:24:23 2006 From: AllieS426 at aol.com (allies426) Date: Wed, 04 Jan 2006 03:24:23 -0000 Subject: comic relief for book 7 Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 145849 It only just occurred to me who else will be at the Weasley wedding besides the trio & the Weasleys- VEELA! Fleur's grandmother is/was a Veela, that means her mother is half Veela, and there could be lots of part veela cousins etc. (In addition to Gabrielle, who is much too young for Harry but might try to charm him anyway.) I see a lot of comic potential here... On a related topic, we saw Veela transform into ugly fire-throwing beasts at the Quidditch World Cup. Fleur is only part Veela, but do you think she might have any of those abilities in her somewhere, or that it would be significant? (Hagrid is only part giant, but he has some of their characteristics such as thick, hex-resistant skin.) Allie From belviso at attglobal.net Wed Jan 4 03:39:41 2006 From: belviso at attglobal.net (Magpie) Date: Tue, 3 Jan 2006 22:39:41 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Real child abuse/ESE!lupin questions References: Message-ID: <016c01c610e0$7f7ec150$b836400c@Spot> No: HPFGUIDX 145850 Alla: > > I cannot speak for Amiable Dorsai of course, but I see very little > similarity between Snape and Draco thinking that Harry gets a > special treatment, entitlement, etc, AND readers like me getting a > satisfaction out of reading about Draco's ego being smacked down. > > Why? Because I don't see a support in the text to Snape and Draco's > POV, on the contrary IMO narrator emphasizes all the time that Harry > does NOT want his fame, has NO sense of entitlement, would give it > all up to have a real family, would give his money to Weasleys in a > twinkle of an eye, etc. So, the way I see it, Draco and Snape may > think along those lines as much as they would like, but I see that > they are wrong, while when I read about Draco, I see exactly what > Amiable Dorsai described - the boy thinking that he is above > everybody else and THAT is IMO supported in the text as well. When > school turns on Harry, we also see that they are wrong - Harry is > NOT a Slytherin Heir, Harry did NOT put his name in Goblet of Fire, > etc,etc, etc. Magpie: Harry sees himself the way Harry sees himself. Snape and Draco see themselves the way they see themselves. They all are pretty sure of their views of the other. I think all their viewpoints are skewed. I live in Harry's head in the text too, but I don't always agree with the way he sees things--including Draco. I don't think Harry always has a view of others (including Draco) that is any more accurate than Draco's view of Harry. I don't think either boy's view of himself is always accurate either. Life would be great if we were always right and humble and did nothing to earn dislike while the person we hate is exactly the way we imagine him to be and deserving of all the hatred that I have so objectively feel for him. I just don't think it's true. In this case, the facts actually do show Harry getting special treatment. Readers knowing good reasons for why Harry deserves or didn't ask for all the special treatment doesn't change that it's there--and the Slytherins aren't privvy to Harry's inner thoughts about how sometimes it sucks to be TBWL. I can't help but find it interesting that the line of conversation goes from the idea that Draco gets special treatment to the idea that he thinks he should get special treatment, to the fact that Harry doesn't want the special treatment he (Harry) gets so Draco should not think of him as getting it. This just makes it seem even more important that these idiots get some perspective on each other and on themselves. -m From mariabronte at yahoo.com Wed Jan 4 03:52:45 2006 From: mariabronte at yahoo.com (Mari) Date: Wed, 04 Jan 2006 03:52:45 -0000 Subject: Moralising and preaching/Loose ends in Book 7 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 145851 What an interesting thread, Geoff :-) Geoff: > I think this may depend on how you interpret moralising and > sermonising. We often draw comparisons with "The Lord of the Rings" > and the Narnia books. In these stories, here and there are occasions > when folk have suggested that Tolkien and Lewis were guilty of doing > just this in their works. In the case of Lewis, it is probably true > because he made it clear that he intended "The Lion, the Witch and > the Wardrobe" to be an allegory of the Christian way to faith. Mari: Just had to jump in here; I did my honours dissertation on the Narnia series and C.S Lewis clearly states that "The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe" began with a picture in his mind; the faun, and the lamp post in the snowy wood. I can only imagine what a dreadful book it would have been if Lewis had sat down before he wrote and said "I am going to write a Christian allegorical story for children". The way he describes it is that Aslan came 'bounding in' and insisted on being a part of the story as it went along. I find the creative process a fascinating thing to reflect on, and think it is seldom something that a writer completely controls. Geoff again: > If someone has a strong faith, then that is going to permeate and > influence what they do and think and it will probably show itself in > their writing unless they make a great effort to mask it or write > from an opposite point of view for effect. It depends, as I said, as > to how far you consider writing from your own world view and letting > that underpin your fiction constitutes moralising and sermonising. Mari again: I absolutely agree; this is one of the reasons I was not surprised to hear that JKR has stated she is a Christian; the underlying world view of the HP books is definitely compatible, at the least, with Christianity. I think if a person is a Christian, their books will be Christian in this sense whether they mention Jesus or God directly or not. Also, bad writing is bad writing whether it is Christian or not. This is the thing I most enjoy about the HP series; as you say, the characters are human, they have real choices to make, and the choices are not always easy. I don't get the feeling that everything will be tied up into a nice little bow at the end, but the resolution will be satisfying I am sure. JKR is far too good a writer and creator of characters to oversimplify or cop out. Mari. From lkctymaheater at aol.com Wed Jan 4 03:17:15 2006 From: lkctymaheater at aol.com (lkctymaheater at aol.com) Date: Tue, 3 Jan 2006 22:17:15 EST Subject: is Dumbledore dead? (was Re: RAB's identity and significance , etc.) Message-ID: <155.5e8f447e.30ec983b@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 145852 Corey, Mrs. Heater, your fellow member, disagrees that DD will not return in any form. Would he be the only former headmaster not to have his likeness milling about in a portrait in what is now (hopefully) McGonagall's office? Respectfully, Mrs. Heater From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Wed Jan 4 05:01:19 2006 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Wed, 04 Jan 2006 05:01:19 -0000 Subject: Harry and Draco's views of each other WAS: Re: Real child abuse In-Reply-To: <016c01c610e0$7f7ec150$b836400c@Spot> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 145853 > Magpie: > > Harry sees himself the way Harry sees himself. Snape and Draco see > themselves the way they see themselves. They all are pretty sure of their > views of the other. I think all their viewpoints are skewed. I live in > Harry's head in the text too, but I don't always agree with the way he sees > things--including Draco. I don't think Harry always has a view of others > (including Draco) that is any more accurate than Draco's view of Harry. I > don't think either boy's view of himself is always accurate either. Alla: Harry is always accurate? Of course not, but yes, I do think that Harry's view of Draco is a great deal more accurate than Draco's view of Harry. And I think HBP confirmed it splendidly. IMO of course. Harry knew that Draco is up to something and Draco was up to very dangerous something. Harry did not know of course that Draco in the middle of cooking up assassination of the Headmaster realized that he is not up to the task. Magpie: > Life would be great if we were always right and humble and did nothing to > earn dislike while the person we hate is exactly the way we imagine him to > be and deserving of all the hatred that I have so objectively feel for him. > I just don't think it's true. Alla: Agree as general philosophical proposition. Disagree on specific application of that general proposition. Harry got Draco's down as "pureblood bigot", Draco IMO is a pureblood bigot. What is wrong with Harry's view of Draco here? IMO nothing. Sure, Harry does not concern himself with the questions why Draco is a bigot, but why should he? Magpie: > In this case, the facts actually do show Harry getting special treatment. Alla: I remember Harry getting special treatment ONCE during six books, namely receiving a broom stick and getting on the Quidditch team in his first year, which I cannot even wholeheartedly call special treatment, because IMO he got on the team because of his talent, not because of special connections or something. While Draco gets on the team during his second year as everybody should, BUT because his father bought broomsticks for the whole team. I think Draco is getting far more preferential treatment, because we are given no clues IMO that he getting on the team has anything to do with him being the best seeker, but in any event, I am ready to concede that Harry got special treatment once. Do you have any other examples of Harry getting special treatment? Magpie: This just makes it seem even more important that these idiots > get some perspective on each other and on themselves. Alla: I think that by the end of HBP Harry is already giving a lot more perspective to Draco than he deserves. Harry feels pity for him and I applaud Harry for that - to feel pity for someone who is directly involved in the murder of his mentor, even if he did not directly cast Avada is remarkable IMO indeed. BUT I am still to see Draco feel ANY positive thought towards Harry. I can totally see Draco surviving the war, somehow escaping Voldemort and turning into new Snape - same hateful character, dislike of Muggleborns ( that is just speculation of course - I don't know if Snape dislikes Muggleborns now) and maybe same hatred of Potter if Harry saves his life. So, no, I don't see that Harry and Draco views of each other are even closely comparable. I mean I can totally see Harry not looking for hidden depths of Draco's character ( and I would have found it weird if Harry DID start looking for hidden depths in Draco) and vice versa, but I don't see Harry's view of Draco's "public persona" as being skewed. IMO of course. I think Harry judged well what he saw of Draco, while Draco's judgment of any part of Harry's character is IMO totally skewed. Having said all that, I can see JKR to make Draco have a revelation AND escape of the trap which Snape put himself in - namely I can see Draco thanking Harry for saving his life and not hating him for it or something like that, but that would be my most optimistic scenario for Draco. Hmmm, maybe Draco will be able to see who Harry really is in book 7 and save Harry's life THAT IMO would be even more optimistic scenario, since I see no signs yet that Draco changed his character disposition. All that I see is that he was unable to finish the murder when he was face to face to his victim, while having no problem trying to kill two students while not being face to face to them. JMO of course, Alla From stevejjen at earthlink.net Wed Jan 4 05:03:21 2006 From: stevejjen at earthlink.net (Jen Reese) Date: Wed, 04 Jan 2006 05:03:21 -0000 Subject: Interview quote re: Lily & Voldemort (Re: "Stand aside, girl"...) In-Reply-To: <192.4f307d04.30ec99e5@aol.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 145854 > Carol wrote: > At any rate, I see no need for fancy theories explaining > Voldemort's motivation, which is explained by the need to kill > Harry and the lack of need for killing Lily. > Julie: > I agree that the most straight-forward explanation for Voldemort > offering Lily her life is that he was focused on Harry and > contemptuous of her abilities. But I still wonder why JKR made a > point of the fact that Voldemort has never offered to spare anyone > else's life. Cedric, for instance, was no threat whatsoever, but > Voldemort killed him simply because it was expedient. At Godric's > Hollow it would have been more expedient to kill Lily immediately > rather than wasting additional seconds telling her to stand aside. > Which makes me suspect there is still some unknown reason > Voldemort spent even that minimal amount of time offering Lily her > life. Jen: And Lily was certainly more of a threat than Cedric. She wasn't a threat at the moment, but she was an Order member during the time Voldemort had apparently decided Order members were to be killed one by one. She had already defied him and was closely allied with Dumbledore. Why offer? I had accepted the scenario Carol presented as practically canon prior to HBP, then JKR said this in the TLC/MN interview: ES: This is one of my burning questions since the third book - why did Voldemort offer Lily so many chances to live? Would he actually have let her live? JKR: Mmhm. ES: Why? JKR: [silence] Can't tell you. But he did offer, you're absolutely right. Don't you want to ask me why James's death didn't protect Lily and Harry? There's your answer, you've just answered your own question, because she could have lived and chose to die." Jen again: So in effect she neatly side-stepped the *real* question asked, "why did Voldemort offer Lily so many chances to live?" and instead answered, "why didn't James' death protect Lily and Harry?" I could be reading too much into her first answer and the side-step . Carol: > My evidence? LV has never expressed anything but contempt for Lily > ("Move aside, silly girl!" "Your Muggle mother," etc.). Granted, > had she resisted him as James did, he would have had to relinquish > this view and duel her, and he no doubt would have found his > contempt misplaced, but ultimately he would have killed her as he > killed James and then murdered Harry--and so much for the WW and > the HP series! Jen: I'm not sure his contempt is any indication, he shows contempt for everyone including Dumbledore, whom he supposedly fears. Carol: > More evidence: LV's treatment of Lily has a precedent in Tom > Riddle's treatment of the boy Hagrid in the diary memory in CoS, > where his real target is Aragog. Obviously he couldn't AK Hagrid > and still be a "hero," but he could have used Stupefy or > Petrificus Totalis. Inside, he orders him to stand aside, exactly > as he orders Lily to stand aside at GoF: "'Stand aside,' said > Riddle, drawing out his wand" (CoS Am. ed., 247). Jen: This analogy is a good one, using the same wording and everything. It also points out possible canon for something more going on with Lily: If it serves Voldemort's purposes for whatever reason, he won't kill a person right away. In the case of Hagrid he needed a scapegoat so he could stay at Hogwarts for the summer. In the COS he didn't call the basilisk until he had time to get information from Harry. The potion in the cave was designed to kill someone but only after Voldemort learned why the person was drinking the potion & looking for the horcrux. I think Godric's Hollow could follow this type of thinking; I'm growing to like the idea he needed information from Lily. Although I still think it's possible there was a bit of concern or fear on his part related to killing Lily. There is canon Voldemort is capable of feeling this --how many times has Harry heard that Voldemort fears Dumbledore? And we don't know why. It could be related to Dumbledore's work on immortality, his power, how he defeated Grindelwald or a combination of the above. If Lily was also working on something related to immortality, or Voldemort assumed she was, perhaps he also had a twinge of fear about her? Just a thought. Jen, not one to give up favorite ideas very easily. :) From Aisbelmon at hotmail.com Wed Jan 4 05:32:28 2006 From: Aisbelmon at hotmail.com (M.Clifford) Date: Wed, 04 Jan 2006 05:32:28 -0000 Subject: First potions lesson In-Reply-To: <20060103135423.33266.qmail@web86209.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 145855 Irene wrote: > People make it sound as if Snape singled out Harry for > attacking him Valky: LOL This is exactly what Snape did do. I don't see how saying he didn't is defensible in the least. Irene: > with Imperio five times in the row. > Rabid dog indeed. Valky: :) It's fair to say that Snape didn't go hell for leather with physical attacks (unforgivables and the like) but I think if we really look at the bread and butter - bread being attack; butter being verbal - of the scenario Snape does get into it pretty rabidly. > Irene: > He just asked him several questions, which were > covered in the textbook. Was it so horribly unfair to > expect Harry to know the anwers? Valky: Hmmm, wasit horribly unfair to expect a ten years oppressed, neglected and battered boy deserves to be singled out, dressed down, and verbally abused and should in response be able to demonstrate a working knowledge of the world that was denied to him all his life? What was horribly unfair was Snape's rude self serving assumptions about who he was dealing with with Harry. Snape had no idea and didn't care to know that Harry wasn't a pompous concieted celebrity coasting easy street into glory, and the assumption that he was, well, it was unfair and uncalled for, especially if he was, as you are saying, Irene, *just* asking several questions. Oh and on another note, is asking *several* questions of one singled out student in an introductory class anything less than a personal affront? really? Irene: > "But he lives with Muggles!", you say. Valky: That have oppressed him and neglected him and denied him his heritage for ten years, I say actually. ;) He lived with Muggles who were so rigidly opposed to anything with the connotation of magic that Harry wouldn't even know the name Houdini, let alone specific details of potion making, as long as they had anything to do with it. > So what, so > does Hermione, yet she've read the book and knows the > answers. Valky: Hermione was *allowed* to read the books, Hermione was *allowed* to know they exist. Harry, Not. However you look at it whether Snape knew it or not, he was being horribly unfair. > "But it's unfair to use Hermione as a yardstick!", you > say. > Why? Because she is clever and enthusiastic about her > studies? Valky: No, because Harry had probably only the best part of a very confusing month of his life to learn these things, whereas Hermione clearly describes that she has been reading about magic for a long time. Furthermore it was Harry who Snape was holding to malicious scrutiny during his first ever experience in the WW, lets take that into account shall we, Snape didn't knock the breath out of Hermione before he asked the questions it was Harry he did that to. > I read this scene as Snape trying to make two points: > 1. I have very high standards here, come to the > lessons prepared or suffer. Valky: Clearly the message was "If you are famous, come ready to prove you deserve it or suffer." > 2. No special treatment for celebrities. Valky: LOL. See point one. From rdoliver30 at yahoo.com Wed Jan 4 05:53:08 2006 From: rdoliver30 at yahoo.com (lupinlore) Date: Wed, 04 Jan 2006 05:53:08 -0000 Subject: Real child abuse In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 145856 > Betsy Hp wrote: > I'm really uncomfortable with that sort of philosophy. Rather > than using rules fairly applied to everybody, some rules are > made for one sort of person and other rules are made for > another sort. So, Draco deserves to be physically tortured > because of who he is. But Neville should never be challanged > because of who he is. Hagrid is allowed to physically endanger > his students. Snape is not allowed to emotionally endanger his. Yep, you are pretty much right on the money. The Potterverse is not an impersonal one. Who you are matters an enormous amount. As we have touched on in another thread, JKR just doesn't like authority and organizations very much, and in large part this is reflected in her intense concentration on the individual and the individual's particular circumstances. So, within the boundaries of the Potterverse, how "rules" are applied or not is very much influenced by the people involved. Lupin gets a pass, by and large, for his faults, as does Hagrid. Snape and Draco do not. Dumbledore gets a pass. Tom Riddle does not. Now, would all these people and their actions be seen as equivalent even in a more bureaucratic, impersonal world such as our own? No, they would not, but that is really beside the point. Who you are matters a very great deal in the Potterverse. Once again, this, I think, is JKR's basic conservatism coming through. She just isn't a classic liberal and doesn't always seem to hold with the liberal idea of the level playing field, particularly when it comes to morality and the moral judgment of characters and their actions. This is illustrated in many ways, but consider one of the more controversial passages in canon -- the final scene with DD in OOTP. While Harry is waiting in DD's office, one of the former headmasters engages him in a benign conversationa and says "Dumbledore thinks very highly of you, as I'm sure you know. Oh yes, holds you in great esteem!" He doesn't say "Dumbledore speaks well of your accomplishments," or "Dumbledore thinks you have done very well indeed here at Hogwarts" or "Dumbledore often praises your deeds" or even "Dumbledore thinks you are a wonderful example," but "Dumbledore thinks very highly of YOU. Yes, holds YOU in great esteem." That is ist is not Harry's accomplishments that primarily impress Dumbledore, or Harry's achievements, or his adherence to a particular set of moral laws, it is who Harry is that DD finds important. Lupinlore From irene_mikhlin at btopenworld.com Wed Jan 4 06:57:31 2006 From: irene_mikhlin at btopenworld.com (irene_mikhlin) Date: Wed, 04 Jan 2006 06:57:31 -0000 Subject: First potions lesson/Stand aside girl and the end In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 145857 dumbledore11214 wrote: > Yes, IMO it was, because IMO no homework was given to the first years prior to coming to Hogwarts. I would find it incredibly strange that especially muggleborns who had no exposure to magic would have been asked to do anything prior to listening to the initial instructions of the teachers. And I found it incredibly strange that a muggle-born child didn't try to find out as much as possible about that new world he's coming to. Including reading all his schoolbooks, yes. > Alla: > > Not because Harry lives with Muggles, although as I said sure I would expected a bit nicer welcome to the new world, but because I think that they were not given any homework yet, so there was no way that Harry COULD have known the answers, IMO of course. What do you mean "there was no way he could"? Right next to him sits a muggleborn student that demonstrated that there is a way. > So I think I could identify with Harry in a sense that he faces the new world and new educational system. I have not gotten such a vicious "welcome" as Harry gets from Snape from ANY law school professor. I started a university in a new country, being exposed to a new language for 6 months. I've got a very vicious "welcome" from one of the professors. "Just get on with it" approach had served me well in this instance, as in many others. I think Harry can use some (possibly he starts to develop it anyway, his attitude to Dementors essay is healthier than what he exhibited before year 6. > I would EXPECT law school professors to be tough, since they are dealing with adults and future lawyers They can't be too tough, or they'll be sued, no? :-) > As to Hermione - yes, I don't think it is fair to take her as an example, because she reads everything. If you could show me that ANY other student knew the answer, it would have been a different story to me. Any example is good enough to demonstrate that it was *possible*. > > Besides, are you SURE that Snape wants students like Hermione in his class? It seems to me that he tells her to shut up all the time. That's probably the only case I can point where Rowling makes a character inconsistent for plot reasons. Not Snape, but Hermione. The girl that's described under Hermione's name elsewhere in the books would have got the point after about 2 Potions lessons. That Rowling keeps Hermione banging her head against the wall must be necessary for plot reasons, otherwise it does not make any sense. Irene From ellecain at yahoo.com.au Wed Jan 4 07:51:39 2006 From: ellecain at yahoo.com.au (ellecain) Date: Wed, 04 Jan 2006 07:51:39 -0000 Subject: Potion in the Cave: The Case for Regulus In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 145858 Hi! Elyse here, not having posted in a while, I thought I would add my 2 knuts to the RAB theory so here goes: > Carol wrote: > > This scenario (I'm not calling it a theory yet) would explain how > Bellatrix knew that LV wasn't dead when he was vaporized at Godric's > Hollow and how Regulus could know about the locket Horcrux and where > to find it. It also ties in with Kreacher's devotion to Bellatrix, > with her words to Snape about being trusted with LV's "most precious" > secrets or missions, and with Kreacher's all-too-evident insanity. > Elyse: If I may tinker around with your theory, making some changes here and there, we might be able to fill up the holes. To begin with I have to say that while I dont think LV would ever give anybody knowledge of his Horcruxes (hes too paranoid for that IMO) this scenario reqiures that he did give it to one of his Death Eaters, with the task of putting it into the cave to hide it. So this would be assumption number one. Other explanations abound of course, but none of them explain how Regulus knew about the cave. >From Bella's bragging one can assume that she was the one entrusted with the mission, but for all we know that may be all hot air. Then again seeing as she is the only other fanatically loyal DE other than Crouch!Moody, that would tip the scales heavily in her direction. And it would provide a neat setup for Regulus to find out about it. Carol : The potion (which I agree is a kind of poisoned memory, > appropriately colored a venomous green like Nagini and the blinding > flash of an AK) would be there as a deterrent to anyone (not > specifically Dumbledore) who got past the other magical protections > (with the water and the Inferi as further protections against anyone > who succeeded in removing from the pensievelike bowl) to prevent it > from being taken from the cave once it was retrieved. Elyse: I dont know...I think that the potion acted more like a Legilimensing agent, extracting a persons worst memory and then storing it within the basin. Oh and of course Voldemort made it himself! It sounds quite in character for him. The reason this idea appeals to me is because of what Dumbledore said about Voldemort not wanting to kill the person in the cave immediately. He would have wanted to know why they were there, how they came to know about the Horcruxes, and so on. So basically you'd have to buy the idea that the potion extracts your worst memory or worst fear while playing it at the same time. Maybe LV thought that the memory, along with the weakening side effects, and the need for water, would be quite enough to deter the Horcrux thief from getting out of the cave. Hence we come to assumption number two: the potion extracts your worst memory (or worst fear) and stores it. So going forth with this, here is your Regulus scenario: > Carol: > After hearing the Prophecy and realizing that the mere existence of > his Horcruxes is not sufficient to guarantee his immortality, > Voldemort assigns the fanatically loyal Bellatrix the task of hiding > his locket, giving her the exact location of the cave and directions > to follow in hiding it and providing her with the potion/memory to > place in the pensievelike bowl, which for the sake of simplicity we'll > assume is already in the cave. Elyse: So far, so good. Carol: To impress on her the importance of her > mission, he actually entrusts Bellatrix with the secret that it's a > Horcrux (though not that it's one of six). Bellatrix, feeling both > honored by this assignment but afraid that she can't do it alone (and > well aware of the consequences of failure), borrows her dear aunt's > devoted house-elf, Kreacher (whom we know to be devoted to "Miss > Bellatrix"), to help her with her task. Elyse: Hmmm, I'm still a bit iffy on the Bellatrix-knew-it-was-a - Horcrux part, but thats just a matter of preference. I agree though, that Bella probably took Kreacher along, made him drink the potion and addled his brains permanantly. Carol: (Regulus overhears this > request.) Trusting entirely to Kreacher's loyalty and not crediting > him with intelligence equal to a human's, she lets slip that the thing > she's hiding is a Horcrux. Elyse: Nope, nope. Dont like it. If shes that loose tongued she'd have blabbed to Snape in Spinner's end IMO. This reminds me of a post by Valky long ago, which made me laugh, but was convincing all the same. I'm quoting part of it here, hope Valky doesnt mind... Valky wrote long ago: "First, let's see, R.A.B. has to know what Horcruxes are. Its a banned subject at Hogwarts, so if it's a young/ish/ character. Say, from Marauders era if we are postulating Reggie, then this person is either a. Not schooled at Hogwarts, or b. very into Dark arts.. perhaps a friend of Severus Snape.." "Otherwise, it's someone from an older generation, also very into Dark Arts. But I am not sure that it has to be good character, since uncovering Voldies secret was actually made rather easy for the bad guys.. Let me show you.." "LV gives Lucius his diary - tells him that he should plant it at Hogwarts - Lucius is stupid enough *once* to use this powerful object to further his own ambition..." "Bella is always bragging about her "in"ness with LV - actually anyone who gets a little tidbit from LV tends to brag a bit don't they, seems in character for a DE, no?" "So heres how I see it, Lucius is doing some bragging, he's the Dark Lords most favoured servant today because LV has entrusted to him, this *really* powerful object.. (whiny bragging tones)." "Oh, what is it Lucius? Whats this really important thing that LV gave you to guard for him?" "Uhh I don't know exactly, but it can open the Chamber of Secrets and command the Monster." "No it can't Lucius you dope, only the Heir of Slytherin can do that.." "Two weeks later.. Hey Reggie, says Bella, Did you know our Master is the Heir of Slytherin.. Pretty cool huh?" "Forehead slap three weeks later. OMG that thing is not what I think it is... is it...?" "Rumours are pretty dangerous aren't they? " "So simple its ridiculous, Voldie has *no* idea, ROFL. seeing as it was *this* easy for the DE's to know what was going on if they could put two and two together. Clearly not Crabbe and Goyles specialty but the *smart* DE's alternately... well.." "Okay so then Voldies bragging on and on about *how* immortal he is, "I'm more immortal than Grindelwald was..." he's singing as he skips through the daisies. And darn it this R.A.B person is onto something here. Could Voldemort make this any *easier* to know?" Elyse again: From this point onwards I agree with the rest. Regulus wants out of the DE's, decides to steal locket, makes Kreacher take him to the cave a second time, forces Kreacher to drink the potion a *second* time so that Kreacher's brains are totally addled without hope for recovery (hee hee..LOL...you get the idea that I really dont like Kreacher?), takes locket home to Grimmauld place, goes out to buy some milk to make tea before trying to destroy the locket, gets AKed as soon as he steps out, and the locket lies in 12GP until Kreacher/Mundungus saves it from Sirius' purge of the house Whew! And I thought this was going to be my "2 knuts"! Elyse From horridporrid03 at yahoo.com Wed Jan 4 08:41:14 2006 From: horridporrid03 at yahoo.com (horridporrid03) Date: Wed, 04 Jan 2006 08:41:14 -0000 Subject: JKR is a Death Eater? (was:Re: Hobbsian worlds; Crime & Punishment) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 145859 > >>Betsy Hp: > > I'm really uncomfortable with that sort of philosophy. Rather > > than using rules fairly applied to everybody, some rules are > > made for one sort of person and other rules are made for another > > sort. So, Draco deserves to be physically tortured because of > > who he is. But Neville should never be challenged because of who > > he is. > >>BAW: > Right. Neville is a nice person. Draco's a jerk. But Neville > WAS challenged; remember his transformation from Wimp!Neville to > KickA@@!Neville in OotP? And, academically, he was able to pull > off a respectable number of OWLS. Betsy Hp: Yes, but the argument is being made that challenging Neville is abuse and torturing Draco is funny. IOW, Neville is a human-being and Draco is a little bit less than human. > >>Lupinlore: > Yep, you are pretty much right on the money. The Potterverse is not > an impersonal one. Who you are matters an enormous amount. > > So, within the boundaries of the Potterverse, how "rules" are > applied or not is very much influenced by the people involved. > Lupin gets a pass, by and large, for his faults, as does Hagrid. > Snape and Draco do not. Dumbledore gets a pass. Tom Riddle does > not. > > Who you are matters a very great deal in the Potterverse. Once > again, this, I think, is JKR's basic conservatism coming through. > Betsy Hp: This is fascinating to me, and I think it really points to how differently we approach the books. Because basically, both Lupinlore and Bruce are saying that JKR agrees with the Death Eater philosophy -- some people are just inherently better and more deserving than others. She may not judge a person by their blood (though there are a lot of blood ties in the story), but she does see some people as "more equal than others", to pull in an Orwellian phrase. I think a lot of the people protesting the lack of morality in the Potterverse, demonstrated most overtly by the severe anti-Slytherin bias seen within, would agree that JKR does think this way. But HBP has convinced me that JKR does not think this way. She went to an awful lot of trouble to give Draco a human side if she's really working with the premise that Draco is less than human and so deserves to suffer inhumane punishments. Since I come at the books with the view point that JKR *is* a moral person who is against bias and prejudice, I read them in an entirely different light. I question the idea that eleven year old children can be classified as evil. I question the idea that only people liked by one rather emotionally damaged little boy can be good. So I don't utterly dismiss the members of Slytherin House. And I don't assume that Cedric Diggory is a bad guy and Fake!Moody a hero. The very fact that JKR sets up as her worst villains people espousing bias and prejudice, the very fact that her main good guy actively works against the bias and prejudice of his world suggests to me that I'm not merrily wandering down a garden path. Book 7 will be the deciding factor of course. But I for one will be shocked if JKR turns out to be ESE. > >>Lupinlore: > > While Harry is waiting in DD's office, one of the former > headmasters engages him in a benign conversationa and > says "Dumbledore thinks very highly of you, as I'm sure you know. > Oh yes, holds you in great esteem!" He doesn't say "Dumbledore > speaks well of your accomplishments," or "Dumbledore thinks you > have done very well indeed here at Hogwarts" or "Dumbledore often > praises your deeds" or even "Dumbledore thinks you are a wonderful > example," but "Dumbledore thinks very highly of YOU. Yes, holds > YOU in great esteem." That is ist is not Harry's accomplishments > that primarily impress Dumbledore, or Harry's achievements, or his > adherence to a particular set of moral laws, it is who Harry is > that DD finds important. Betsy Hp: In my neck of the woods this is what's known as parental love. Loving a child for who he is, not what he's achieved, is what good fathers (or grandfathers) do. And that does not contradict a non- biased code of morals, nor does it suggest that prejudice is good. Dumbledore is allowed to love Harry. What he should not do is make one set of rules for Harry and another for all the other students. That can be hard for a parent to do, which is why most teachers avoid having their own children in their classroom. And Dumbledore may have fallen down a time or two. But his love for Harry does not prevent Dumbledore from seeing Draco as a human-being just as worthy as Harry. I think JKR felt Dumbledore did the right thing for Draco on the tower. And I think the scene on the tower is a good place to look if we want to get a glimpse of JKR's moral beliefs. Betsy Hp From drednort at alphalink.com.au Wed Jan 4 08:41:06 2006 From: drednort at alphalink.com.au (Shaun Hately) Date: Wed, 04 Jan 2006 19:41:06 +1100 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: First potions lesson In-Reply-To: References: <20060103135423.33266.qmail@web86209.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <43BC24D2.11297.958EBE@localhost> No: HPFGUIDX 145860 > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Irene Mikhlin > wrote: > Geoff: > I'm afraid I don't read it in this way. This is no way to treat a > class - or especially a single pupil - on their first encounter. This is somewhat embarassing to talk about... but I've talked about my own school experiences and how I see them relating to Harry Potter in the past, and it hasn't killed me yet. When I was 12, I endured a year of hell on earth at school. Numerous reasons - why it happened isn't that relevant on this occasion - but as a result of attempts to find out why I was going through so many problems I was psychologically tested - and was found to have an extremely high IQ. They also decided that the schooling I was receiving was incompatible with my needs, and so on the advice of the psychologists my parents managed to get me admitted to an exclusive private school from the start of the following year. My reactions to this school once I started there and got to know the place were rather similar to Harry's to Hogwarts. I felt like I'd come home in a sense. Found a place I belonged that I hadn't known existed before. That's one reason why Philosopher's Stone so appealed to me the first time I read it - because of the similarity in feelings. But it took me a little while to work this out - when I first started at this new school, I was clinically depressed (because of my previous years experiences), I was incredibly nervous - because this was a very new environment for me, and I was conscious that my background was not the normal one for such a school. And while I wasn't by any means as famous as Harry Potter, I was in a situation that I consider slightly similar. It was very rare for a boy to be admitted to this school at the level I was joining it (there was a normal entry point a year younger than me, and one a year older - but at this point it was extremely rare for someone to join the school - and my future classmates knew this. A small number of them had also met me at a camp a couple of weeks earlier where I had dominated a trivia night and a competition based on logical reasoning... and so a rumour had spread through the school that I was some sort of child prodigy, some sort of genius. There was enough truth in this that I was in a pretty awkward position. Now, my new teachers had naturally been briefed about me. And in my first lessons, two of these teachers basically did to me pretty much exactly what Snape did to Harry in his first lesson. As the academic standard at this school was much higher than that of my old school, I didn't have the mathematics knowledge needed to answer my Maths teachers questions - and the other teacher was teaching us Latin, which my new classmates were starting for the first time as well - I wasn't equipped to answer his questions either. I can't be sure exactly why those teachers did what they did. But I know that it broke down some barriers for me, and I suppose that may have been the reasons they did it. My classmates stopped being convinced I was some sort of freak and a lot of the awkwardness went away (unfortunately some things I did later rebuilt some of it - but that was self inflicted). Is Snape doing the same thing for Harry in that first lesson? I have to say I doubt it - while I often defend Snape's teaching methods in general, I think that in the non-general, specific case of Harry, he does unfairly target him, so I'd be rather surprised to discover he had been deliberately acting in Harry's best interests in that first class. Nonetheless, I do wonder if it may have had a positive effect for Harry overall (even if it is accidental). He is the 'Boy Who Lived'. Everybody in his new world knows who he is. The other kids must, it seems to me, have misconceptions about him based on the little they know. Snape shows them, in that lesson, that Harry isn't all that special. He isn't all that unusual. He's just a kid who is at Hogwarts for the same reason as the rest of them. To learn. And while Harry isn't arrogant about his past (partly because he knows so little about it), frankly, I was when I started my new school. I'd been told that I was smarter than just about anyone else I'd ever met. I hate to admit it (and in my defence I would point out that I'd been made to feel so worthless during the previous year that I don't think jumping the other way was all that surprising). That attitude would *not* have done me any favours in my new school. Taking me down a peg or two in those first classes was probably the kindest way of dealing with my incipient arrogance in the short term. OK - Harry didn't have that problem. He wasn't arrogant. But I don't think it's unreasonable for Snape to have suspected he might have been. Harry looks a lot like his father - when Snape saw him, he must have noticed the resemblance, it would seem to me. And from what we know of James, he was arrogant. Dumbledore knew the risks Harry could become arrogant - and took steps to try and limit the chances of that happening, but keeping him away from the Wizarding World - so I don't think it's unreasonable for Snape to have considered it a possibility as well. Yes, he's wrong... but if he'd been right... then maybe that first class could have been a much more positive experience for Harry, long term, than it actually is. Yours Without Wax, Dreadnought Shaun Hately | www.alphalink.com.au/~drednort/thelab.html (ISTJ) | drednort at alphalink.com.au | ICQ: 6898200 "You know the very powerful and the very stupid have one thing in common. They don't alter their views to fit the facts. They alter the facts to fit the views. Which can be uncomfortable if you happen to be one of the facts that need altering." The Doctor - Doctor Who: The Face of Evil Where am I: Frankston, Victoria, Australia From vuurdame at xs4all.nl Wed Jan 4 09:35:00 2006 From: vuurdame at xs4all.nl (festuco) Date: Wed, 04 Jan 2006 09:35:00 -0000 Subject: Voldemort vs. Tom In-Reply-To: <7352783.1136322774329.JavaMail.administrator@webmail> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 145861 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, bawilson at c... wrote: > > True; but one young enough to change and heal. Had Dumbledore > taken a more proactive mentoring approach to Tom, he might not > have turned to the Dark Side. Very unlikely. what we have seen from Tom Riddle at Hogwarts was a very gifted, very popular child, by teachers as well as fellow students. He was prefect and later head boy. If that kind of environment is not full of healingh, what is? Besides, what kind of healing would he need? True, the orphanage was not the best of environments, but the rest of the kids managed to have their values straight. What on earth should DD have done? Explain to him the difference between good and evil? Don't you think he already knew that even before he came to Hogwarts? Gerry From zarleycat at sbcglobal.net Wed Jan 4 12:53:48 2006 From: zarleycat at sbcglobal.net (kiricat4001) Date: Wed, 04 Jan 2006 12:53:48 -0000 Subject: Sirius' father In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 145862 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "katydid3626" wrote: > > > > Steph: > > Who do you think is R.A.B that was mentioned in the 6th book > > and what significance does it have? Do you think that > > R.A.B is Regulus Black? And what do we know of him so far? > > > > > katydid wrote: > I have a question that has been bothering me for some time. What > does anyone know about Sirius Blacks' father? We see mention of > his mother and the portrait..but nothing at all about the father. > Can anyone help? I have been unable to even find a name, as I > thought he could perhaps be RAB. > Marianne: We don't know a thing about Mr. Black, except that we can infer that he's dead, as Sirius inherited 12 GP. And that he had the same pureblood mentality that we've heard spewed forth by Mrs. Black/s portrait. Maybe JKR hasn't told us a thing because he isn't important to the story line. Or maybe who he is/was will be a key bit of information, but JKR has managed to deflect any interest in him because her portrayal of the truly awful Mrs. Black has taken precedence. I've seen some speculation in the past that perhaps Snape was Mr. Black's bastard son, which could have added to the enmity between Sev and Sirius, if somehow both boys found out about it during their Hogwarts days. Even if he has no part to play, I'd still like to know what his name was, if only to see if there is any celestial significance to it. Marianne From spaebrun at yahoo.com Wed Jan 4 11:43:46 2006 From: spaebrun at yahoo.com (spaebrun) Date: Wed, 04 Jan 2006 11:43:46 -0000 Subject: CHAPDISC: HBP7, The Slug Club (Slughorn) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 145863 > AHK wrote: > > "9. The luncheon scene with Slughorn highlights the personality > > traits that we glimpsed in "Horace Slughorn." Did this scene cement > > your opinion of Slughorn, did it change your first impression from > > the earlier chapter, or did your opinion undergo a transformation > > later, say, after seeing the full horcrux memory?" > > Amanda: > I felt from the beginning that Slughorn was a user and this just cemented my belief. He doesn't care about anyone or anything but his self and where people he meets can take him. Reed: I don't see Slughorn's character so negative as Amanda and several other people responding to the Chapterdisc seem to do. He certainly has all the flaws the were mentioned: putting his own comfort first, using people to his advantage, being susceptible to flattery. He probably also lacks Gryffindore-type bravery (though I'd say that hiding from DD was not an act of cowardice but a strategy of avoidance - he simply didn't want to talk to DD, as he already suspected that DD would succeed in talking him into returning to Hogwarts). Still I think Slughorn has a decent core. He is genuinely sorry about having told Tom Riddle about the Horcruxes. He never considers to join the Death Eaters, even though he might lead a quite comfortable life, brewing poisons for them. So you see that his own advantage is *not* the only thing he cares about, and he knows right from wrong quite well. I think that DD is aware of this and that it is the reason why he trusts Slughorn and considers him a friend in spite of his flaws. I rather like Slughorn as a character and my view of him didn't change during the course of the story. All additional information was consistant with the way he was presented in the first scene. Slughorn is a Slytherin - in fact, he's the 'good Slytherin' we've been waiting for: A character who has definite Slytherin traits, but is still decent. Phineas Nigellus was probably the first glimpse of this type we got* and I think JKR did a very good job portraying another variety of it in greater detail with Slughorn - even though I'm still eagerly awaiting the 'good Slytherin' of the student generation... Reed * I leave aside Snape here, for whatever you think of him - Snape is so complex as a character that he can't serve to characterize Slytherin House. From speedy_j_g at yahoo.de Wed Jan 4 08:08:39 2006 From: speedy_j_g at yahoo.de (speedy_j_g) Date: Wed, 04 Jan 2006 09:08:39 +0100 Subject: First potions lesson/Stand aside girl and the end In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <43BB8287.9070801@yahoo.de> No: HPFGUIDX 145864 irene_mikhlin wrote: >And I found it incredibly strange that a muggle-born child didn't try >to find out as much as possible about that new world he's coming to. >Including reading all his schoolbooks, yes. > > Which he did. Discernable from The Philosopher's stone chapter six. I don't think I could have read many books and know every one of them by heart. Besides Snapes questions are not only of potions but herbology as well. >What do you mean "there was no way he could"? Right next to him sits a >muggleborn student that demonstrated that there is a way. > > Said muggleborn student doesn't live in an opressive home, where she is beaten for unexplainable things that happen around her. >Any example is good enough to demonstrate that it was *possible*. > > Having Hermiones memory he probably could have known all that. My 5 cents speedy From latha272 at indiatimes.com Wed Jan 4 08:28:47 2006 From: latha272 at indiatimes.com (scamjunk22) Date: Wed, 04 Jan 2006 08:28:47 -0000 Subject: Snape's Dementor Essay In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 145865 potioncat wrote: > In the beginning of HBP chapter 21 Ron, and several other 6th years > are working on "a viciously difficult essay for Snape." Harry and > Hermione have already finished it. Harry expects to get low marks > because he disagreed with Snape over the "best way to tackle > dementors." > So, why do you think the essay is so hard? > I know we discussed once before whether Snape had a different way > of fighting Dementors than Lupin did, or if he had a different way > of conjuring a Patronus. And of course, we won't discover whether > Harry was right about the marks. Scam : Yes, it did strike me in my first reading itself that Snape knew of other methods to tackle dementors .... what could it be? On the same note --- doesn't the Peruvian Darkness powder bring about the same kind of darkness (sans the cold and misery) as the dementors? The dementors' presence first brings about darkness, no? Why do I have a terrible feeling that it is somehow connected to the dementors' breeding ..... Also, how DO those terrible things breed? Does it mean that there are male and female dementors? and their offsprings are also dead and rotting????? Yuck ..... the very thought gives me goosebumps .... Scam (vigourously shaking her head in a failing effort to throw out these sick thoughts from her mind) From irene_mikhlin at btopenworld.com Wed Jan 4 13:30:28 2006 From: irene_mikhlin at btopenworld.com (Irene Mikhlin) Date: Wed, 4 Jan 2006 13:30:28 +0000 (GMT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: CHAPDISC: HBP7, The Slug Club (Slughorn) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20060104133028.87843.qmail@web86208.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 145866 --- spaebrun wrote: > Reed: > I don't see Slughorn's character so negative as > Amanda and several other people > responding to the Chapterdisc seem to do. I don't get all the negativity as well. He invited Neville to the Slug Club. Neville does not have any useful connections at present. The only motivation for Slughorn seems to be Neville's potential to become a person similar to his parents. Also, associating with a boy whose family has some serious feud with Voldemort's supporters seems careless for someone who's supposed to sit on the fence. Irene ___________________________________________________________ Yahoo! Exclusive Xmas Game, help Santa with his celebrity party - http://santas-christmas-party.yahoo.net/ From kchuplis at alltel.net Wed Jan 4 13:17:10 2006 From: kchuplis at alltel.net (kchuplis) Date: Wed, 04 Jan 2006 13:17:10 -0000 Subject: First potions lesson/Stand aside girl and the end In-Reply-To: <43BB8287.9070801@yahoo.de> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 145867 OK, I can't stand it. You people mean to tell me that you think an 11 year old child was supposed to take, what, 5 textbooks and in the three or four weeks before his first lesson, in a completely foreign world should have been able to answer any question thrown at him on the very first day and in the very first class? Really? You honestly believe this? First of all, Hermione has demonstrated almost photographic memory capabilities (in several books Ron asks her how she remembers things word for word basically, as she often does quote both what she has read and what people have said word for word) and you expect all the kids to be able to do this? The point is pounded home more than once that Hermione is exceptional for any age. And if Snape were interested in anything except humiliating Harry, he would have moved on to Miss Granger since she DID have her hand up. This was the first class. He'd never met Hermione either and at this point her "know it all" reputation is completely new territory. Are *any* of you telling me that you could have done this? I'm no idiot. I have an MFA and a fairly high IQ and I can guarantee you that I could not have done that at 11 or 21 or now. That's just silly. To be honest, if that was reasonable, there would be little or no need for school at all. To accuse JKR of character inconsistancy is ludicris, IMO. kchuplis From becks3uk at yahoo.co.uk Wed Jan 4 12:31:59 2006 From: becks3uk at yahoo.co.uk (Rebecca Williams) Date: Wed, 4 Jan 2006 12:31:59 +0000 (GMT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: RAB's identity and significance / Sirius' father In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20060104123159.14011.qmail@web25312.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 145868 katydid wrote: I have a question that has been bothering me for some time. What does anyone know about Sirius Blacks' father? We see mention of his mother and the portrait..but nothing at all about the father. Can anyone help? I have been unable to even find a name, as I thought he could perhaps be RAB. Becky: Wow, that's a good point. I didn't think of that and haven't heard it mentioned. In OotP, Sirius said that Kreacher 'wasn't quite as devoted to his father as his mother' which makes me think he wasn't quite as unpleasant as she was. Perhaps he stole the horcrux as revenge for LV killing his youngest son. JKR said that RAB being Regulus Black was a 'fine guess'but that doesn't mean it was correct, maybe just close. From irene_mikhlin at btopenworld.com Wed Jan 4 13:46:34 2006 From: irene_mikhlin at btopenworld.com (Irene Mikhlin) Date: Wed, 4 Jan 2006 13:46:34 +0000 (GMT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: First potions lesson/Stand aside girl and the end In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20060104134634.91237.qmail@web86209.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 145869 --- kchuplis wrote: > Are *any* of you telling me that you could have done > this? I'm no idiot. I have an MFA > and a fairly high IQ and I can guarantee you that I > could not have done that at 11 or > 21 or now. That's just silly. To be honest, if that > was reasonable, there would be little > or no need for school at all. To accuse JKR of > character inconsistancy is ludicris, IMO. I've never said it was reasonable, merely that it was not impossible. Surely I can't be the only one who understands that the difference between "very difficult" and "impossible" is huge? Hermione is exceptional, yes, but her existance is enough to prove it's not impossible. Could *I* have done this? Not now, but I'm quite confident that I could at 11. Irene ___________________________________________________________ Yahoo! Messenger - NEW crystal clear PC to PC calling worldwide with voicemail http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com From ellecain at yahoo.com.au Wed Jan 4 14:12:34 2006 From: ellecain at yahoo.com.au (ellecain) Date: Wed, 04 Jan 2006 14:12:34 -0000 Subject: JKR a Death Eater? (was:Re: Hobbsian worlds; Crime & Punishment) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 145870 Elyse's second post of the day, and one written with some qualms as to whether she is really eqipped to engage in this sort of discussion. Going forth, though I have to clarify here that I am in total agreement with Betsy here, and she has expressed my views so eloquently that I have very little to add. > > >>Betsy Hp: > > > I'm really uncomfortable with that sort of philosophy. Rather > > > than using rules fairly applied to everybody, some rules are > > > made for one sort of person and other rules are made for another > > > sort. So, Draco deserves to be physically tortured because of > > > who he is. But Neville should never be challenged because of who > > > he is. > > > >>BAW: > > Right. Neville is a nice person. Draco's a jerk. > Betsy Hp: > Yes, but the argument is being made that challenging Neville is > abuse and torturing Draco is funny. IOW, Neville is a human-being > and Draco is a little bit less than human. > > > >>Lupinlore: > > Yep, you are pretty much right on the money. The Potterverse is not > > an impersonal one. Who you are matters an enormous amount. > > > > So, within the boundaries of the Potterverse, how "rules" are > > applied or not is very much influenced by the people involved. > > Lupin gets a pass, by and large, for his faults, as does Hagrid. > > Snape and Draco do not. Dumbledore gets a pass. Tom Riddle does > > not. > > Elyse: This reminds me of an old argument of Lupinlore's,called "Face it, there is a reward for being nice" when I had raised the objection that Snape and Hagrid were equally culpable with regards to their teaching methods but Hagrid was allowed to go free. The link to that post is: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/140293 (it might not work, I'm not sure of how to make a link yet - anyway the message number is up there) I've quoted parts of it below, and I think this is what Lupinlore is saying again (correct me if I'm wrong Lupinlore). While I agree that law or the application of rules in an ideal universe, which we strive for, *should be* the same for all individuals (I think its time someone brought upa little antian philosophy) when it comes to the real world, emotional empathy for one individual over another, acts as a bias/factor in the process. I'm not good at explaining so here is Lupinlore again in message 140293: "But, in the world of social, cultural, and personal actions, nice people DO get breaks. That may not seem fair when viewed objectively, but the personal and social world is not objective. In the real world of real interactions, or even in the routine world of fictional interactions, people are not lawyers arguing from legal definitions of liability nor are they Jesuits concerned with determining applications of universal moral principles in complicated specific situations. In the real world, people are emotional and instinctive creatures who naturally regard nice people one way and mean people another way. It's just part of being human." So while as Betsy says, there should be one and only one set of rules that apply to a student, whether he is Harry or Draco, whether he is Slytherin or Gryffindor, whether he is a Mugglelover or a Pureblood bigot, the fact remains that when Draco gets bounced around the dungeon floor, it is a little forgivable in people's eyes, because he is mean and prejudiced. This does not of course make the action itself any less horrible. It just *seems* a little less horrible because Draco had it coming for a long time. > Betsy Hp: > This is fascinating to me, and I think it really points to how > differently we approach the books. Elyse: Me too, this is fascinating. This is why I joined the group in the first place. All these different perspectives and interpretations! Betsy: Because basically, both > Lupinlore and Bruce are saying that JKR agrees with the Death Eater > philosophy -- some people are just inherently better and more > deserving than others. She may not judge a person by their blood > (though there are a lot of blood ties in the story), but she does > see some people as "more equal than others", to pull in an Orwellian > phrase. Elyse: I dont think Lupinlore ,at least ,is saying some people are better than others, just that their overall demeanour affects how the rules are applied to them. (I hope so anyway) > Betsy: > I think a lot of the people protesting the lack of morality in the > Potterverse, demonstrated most overtly by the severe anti- Slytherin > bias seen within, would agree that JKR does think this way. But HBP > has convinced me that JKR does not think this way. She went to an > awful lot of trouble to give Draco a human side if she's really > working with the premise that Draco is less than human and so > deserves to suffer inhumane punishments. > > Since I come at the books with the view point that JKR *is* a moral > person who is against bias and prejudice, I read them in an entirely > different light. Elyse: Yup, Betsy and I are on the same page alright. She gave Draco A LOT of sympathetic writing in this book. Not outright, but more in what Elkins called the "Hurt-Comfort" way, especially in that bathroom scene with Myrtle. She went to great lengths to present Draco's suffering as human. So even though she was the one who presented him as a pureblood mean bigot for 5 books, she showed us that his suffering is not funny. > > >>Lupinlore: > > > > While Harry is waiting in DD's office, one of the former > > headmasters engages him in a benign conversationa and > > says "Dumbledore thinks very highly of you, as I'm sure you know. > > Oh yes, holds you in great esteem!" That is its not Harry's accomplishments > > that primarily impress Dumbledore, or Harry's achievements, or his > > adherence to a particular set of moral laws, it is who Harry is > > that DD finds important. Elyse: Exactly! Because Harry is a human being above all else. A human being with capacity for compassion and reasoning and intellect, but above all with choice. And so is Draco. That is why the ought to play by the same rules. It reminds me of a quote: "A man should not be judged because of where he comes from, what he thinks, what he does, but who he is." And he is a human being. > > Betsy Hp: > > Dumbledore is allowed to love Harry. What he should not do is make > one set of rules for Harry and another for all the other students. > > may have fallen down a time or two. But his love for Harry does not > prevent Dumbledore from seeing Draco as a human-being just as worthy > as Harry. I think JKR felt Dumbledore did the right thing for Draco > on the tower. And I think the scene on the tower is a good place to > look if we want to get a glimpse of JKR's moral beliefs. > > Betsy Hp > Elyse: Hear Hear. Dumbledore actions on the tower with regards to Draco were what made him the greatest wizard of all time. Elyse From amiabledorsai at yahoo.com Wed Jan 4 14:23:03 2006 From: amiabledorsai at yahoo.com (amiabledorsai) Date: Wed, 04 Jan 2006 14:23:03 -0000 Subject: Real child abuse/ESE!lupin questions In-Reply-To: <016c01c610e0$7f7ec150$b836400c@Spot> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 145871 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Magpie" wrote: > Magpie: > > Harry sees himself the way Harry sees himself. Snape and Draco see > themselves the way they see themselves. They all are pretty sure of > their views of the other. But that's what started this--perception. It's our (well, my since you don't seem to share it) perception of Draco's belief that he is above other mortals that makes the ferret scene so much fun (for me and Ron, at least:-). After all, he's finally getting the extra consideration that he's always believed a Malfoy is entitled to. To change the subject a little: I'm sorry for my abysmal reply record on this thread. I've been out of town without a reliable internet connection, and the road trip has apparently excacerbated a lung infection that I thought was under control. The administrators of this hospital seem to believe that good internet connnectivity for patients is lower priority than, say, getting us healthy again. Some people have no sense of what's important. On the other hand, it does mean that I'm getting some writing done. I may get around to finishing a story that's been on hold for way too long over on the Sugarquill. Boredom is a wonderful motivator for creativity. Amiable Dorsai From midnightowl6 at hotmail.com Wed Jan 4 15:00:43 2006 From: midnightowl6 at hotmail.com (P J) Date: Wed, 04 Jan 2006 10:00:43 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: "Stand aside, girl" and the End In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 145872 > PJ: > > Well, since Peter was the first to find Voldermort after escaping the > Shrieking Shack, I believe he was able to give LV much more than even Bertha > Jorgenson on a wide range of things that had happened since GH. He'd have > been present for family discussions and possibly even Order meetings! Who > watches what they say in front of their pets? > > Oddly enough though, none of the adults in the WW so much as mention this > potential disaster. > >Pippin: >The Weasleys weren't members of the Order in VW I. That brings up an >interesting point. If Peter was always intending to scamper back to >Voldemort >when Voldemort grew strong again, why didn't he pick an Order family to >spy on? He might have feared running into Lupin, I suppose, but in that >case wouldn't he have abandoned Ron as soon as Lupin showed up in PoA? PJ: The DEs were killing off the Order members from VW1 quickly so Peter may have felt it was best to choose a non-involved family while waiting for Voldermort to return. I believe he chose a large family with someone who worked at the MoM on purpose and maybe even the Weasleys in particular. He also knew that in a large family like the Weasleys he could be passed down as a pet from child to child, giving him security while waiting for the time LV could return. But, at least for the 2-3 years before LV's return Peter/Scabbers was indeed situated in the perfect place to gain all sorts of information. The Weasleys were important Order members (meetings were even held at the Burrow until Sirius gave them 12 G.P.) and Ron took him to Hogwarts as well. The best of both worlds for an LV spy, IMO. Luck? Maybe, but it worked out perfectly for Peter and LV. As for Lupin recognizing him, I'm sure he stayed out of sight (but not out of hearing range) while Lupin was around though there would be no reason for Lupin to suspect the Weasley pet rat was the same Pettigrew who had died in that blast. There wasn't a bit of danger to Peter/Scabbers until Sirius escaped from prison which was when Scabbers started acting oddly (losing hair, running away, biting Ron,etc). PJ From jferer at yahoo.com Wed Jan 4 15:00:54 2006 From: jferer at yahoo.com (Jim Ferer) Date: Wed, 04 Jan 2006 15:00:54 -0000 Subject: Real child abuse In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 145873 Lupinlore: "This is illustrated in many ways, but consider one of the more controversial passages in canon -- the final scene with DD in OOTP. While Harry is waiting in DD's office, one of the former headmasters engages him in a benign conversation and says "Dumbledore thinks very highly of you, as I'm sure you know. Oh yes, holds you in great esteem! " He doesn't say "Dumbledore speaks well of your accomplishments," or "Dumbledore thinks you have done very well indeed here at Hogwarts" or "Dumbledore often praises your deeds" or even "Dumbledore thinks you are a wonderful example," but "Dumbledore thinks very highly of YOU. Yes, holds YOU in great esteem." That is it is not Harry's accomplishments that primarily impress Dumbledore, or Harry's achievements, or his adherence to a particular set of moral laws, it is who Harry is that DD finds important." This seems a manifestly odd interpretation of this passage. Harry's accomplishments are part of Harry; it is his character *and* his accomplishments that cause Dumbledore to hold Harry in high esteem. Don't Harry's accomplishments flow in large part from who Harry is, meaning his character, courage, and resourcefulness? I didn't pack the gear to do what Harry did at that age. If Harry has earned distinction above more ordinary people like, for example, me, that is not unjust. It is not Harry's birth, family, or wealth that Dumbledore admires, it's Harry himself. And why should he not? Dumbledore believes Harry has earned this esteem. I agree. JKR seems to believe that courage and loyalty earn merit, and she's right. And, it pleases me that the former headmasters don't speak like bureaucrats. Jim Ferer From meriaugust at yahoo.com Wed Jan 4 15:25:08 2006 From: meriaugust at yahoo.com (meriaugust) Date: Wed, 04 Jan 2006 15:25:08 -0000 Subject: CHAPDISC: HBP7, The Slug Club In-Reply-To: <20060103010702.10570.qmail@web36814.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 145875 Meri now: > 1. This is the beginning of what will be a year-long obsession with Draco for Harry. In hindsight, what does this reveal about Harry's powers of discernment? Meri - Is it just me or did anyone else get the feeling (at this point, anyway) that JKR was just retreading all the Harry/Draco stuff of the past only to, at the end of the book, at long last prove Harry right and reveal Draco as a conspirator and bad guy? Harry's been trying to bust Draco for *something* ever since first year and I guess he was bound to get it right once. But he's cried "Wolf!" so many times against Draco that there's no one left to believe him; even Ron and Hermione, who were first on the "Draco as Heir of Slytherin" bandwagon all those years ago don't believe. And Dumbledore never lets Harry in to the inner workings of whatever plan he had with Snape, so who can he get help from? > 2. The Aurors in the scene are men we have never seen before. Is this done to highlight the changes at the Ministry of Magic, or is there some more sinister reason? Meri - The MoM is bringing out the big guns: the wizarding equivalent of Secret Service, FBI Special Agents, CIA assassins, State Troopers, Special Ops, Navy SEALs and Marines. I wouldn't be surprised if Harry is still being tailed by both members of the Order and the MoM security forces now. > 3. Compare this train scene with the early train scene in OOP. How do his feelings toward Neville and Luna compare in the two scenes? What does this scene do for our understanding of the Harry in HBP? Meri - Harry's grown up a little. He knows coolness is far less important than loyalty and real friendship and dedication, which both Luna and Neville have shown to Harry in the past (all through the MoM battle, Luna's comforting words at the end of OotP, etc.) and something Cho never showed him. Neville's low self-esteem just kills me and hearing Harry try to boost him up, hearing Harry (both here and later on in the book) appreciating Luna's quirkiness, gives me hope that he's become a little more sensitive and has retained his compassion, something I've always thought to be one of his strong points. A great scene, one of the best Hogwarts Express scenes written. snip > 9. The luncheon scene with Slughorn highlights the personality traits that we glimpsed in "Horace Slughorn." Did this scene cement your opinion of Slughorn, did it change your first impression from the earlier chapter, or did your opinion undergo a transformation later, say, after seeing the full horcrux memory? Meri - I still don't have a firm grasp of Slughorn. I'm wondering if he's the famous "good Slytherin" that JKR has promised us for all these years. He's not evil, nor is he a morally reprehensible person, though I think I might spend most of my time around him rolling my eyes. He is loyal to DD and yet his favor can be bought by a box of crystalized pinneapple or an invite to a choice party. He is intellegent but not clear-minded enough to sense young Tom Riddle's ambitions. He doesn't seem outrageously prejudiced against Muggleborns, and yet whenever he talks of them he identifies them as such. He is the first replacement teacher we've seen survive the year relatively intact, and he is a good teacher, but to use children for networking purposes seems a little low. He seems a little like a good back-room type person to know: he knows everyone and knows who knows everyone else, and he might be a good ally for Harry to have, but he's got his share of Slytherin faults as well. So I really don't know. snip > 11. I find the end of this chapter difficult to read, wishing at an emotional level that Harry would use more caution. Harry's impulsiveness has gotten him into scrapes before, and he once again takes a chance and loses. How do you think this tendency will play out? (Curiosity killed the cat or caution makes cowards of us all?) Meri - I think we still have to keep in mind that Harry's still a kid. He's allowed to make rash decisions and foolish mistakes and this is a prime example. He will have to reign in these tendencies during the coming book, learn to keep his head in the thick of situations (something that he can learn from Hermione) and learn to strategize and plan. Perhaps he should brew up a pot of Felix Felicis and keep it in a vial in his pocket; he might need it to get through this ;-) Meri - thanking the author for an excellent discussion...and still wondering what in the world crystalized pinneapple is... From willsonkmom at msn.com Wed Jan 4 15:25:19 2006 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Wed, 04 Jan 2006 15:25:19 -0000 Subject: First potions lesson/Stand aside girl and the end In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 145876 "kchuplis" wrote: > > OK, I can't stand it. You people mean to tell me that you think an 11 year old child > was supposed to take, what, 5 textbooks and in the three or four weeks before his > first lesson, in a completely foreign world should have been able to answer any > question thrown at him on the very first day and in the very first class? Really? You > honestly believe this? Potioncat: There is so much happening in this first Potions class, I don't really know where to begin, so I'll start with canon: "Thought you wouldn't open a book before coming, eh, Potter?" Harry forced himself to keep looking straight into those cold dark eyes. He *had* looked through his books at the Dursleys', but did Snape expect him to remember everything in *One Thousand Magical Herbs and Fungi*?" (That was just to counter the arguments that Harry couldn't look at his books. He did look them over. Snape might expect him to remember everything, I wouldn't.) JKR set us up. At the first moment Snape was a recognised character...the overly stern, unreasonable teacher who causes grief for the hero. He didn't need a reason to be mean. It's his job. We could just sit back and read it without thinking too much. Then by the end of the book his role changed and we began to ask questions. Like, Why did he do that? We don't really know Snape's motivation in the first class. (Can't you just hear Rickman asking, What's my motivation in this scene? No? OK, moving right along...) Prior to this class, on the first page of the chapter,we're given a description of Harry's celebrity. He is getting lots of attention from students and teachers. So, Snape knows Harry Potter is a celebrity. Harry knows it too. Snape may be insanely jealous of James Potter and may expect Harry to be just like his father (as do many others). We know James didn't always study and was a big hero/celebrity, which he seemed to enjoy. (IMHO, OoP) So perhaps that is what Snape is expecting Harry to be like. Snape knows something of the prophesy, knows that LV did something to Harry. He may have sensed something of LV in Harry, as the Sorting Hat did, and as Trelawney seems to (without knowing it). So Snape may be trying to ferret out signs of the Dark Lord. Tom Riddle was a very popular student, liked by classmates and teachers. Except for one teacher. Read the description in HBP, Tom/DD sounds just like Harry/Snape. (Except of course, DD is nicer.) It may be a combination of both, and he's trying to scare Harry into paying attention. Is it a good way to start off teaching 11 year old kids. Nope. Potioncat who hopes she didn't make this too concise. From agdisney at msn.com Wed Jan 4 15:48:44 2006 From: agdisney at msn.com (agdisney) Date: Wed, 04 Jan 2006 15:48:44 -0000 Subject: Spinners End Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 145877 I'm re-re-re-reading HBP again and two things keep coming up in this chapter. Pg. 24 Scholastic Snape held up a hand to stop her, then pointed his wand again at the concealed staircase door. There was a loud bang and a squeal, followed by the sound of Wormtail scurrying back up the stairs. "My apologies," said Snape. "He has lately taken to listening at doors, I don't know what he means by it... Who else has been visiting Snape that Wormtail has been listening in on? And, when Snape returns to Hogwarts for the school year, where does Wormatil go? I don't see Snape or LV leaving Wormtail in the house alone. Is he shipped off to another DE, or back to LV? I don't see how leaving him in a Muggle neighborhood by himself would be a good idea. From midnightowl6 at hotmail.com Wed Jan 4 15:49:24 2006 From: midnightowl6 at hotmail.com (P J) Date: Wed, 04 Jan 2006 10:49:24 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: First potions lesson/Stand aside girl and the end In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 145878 Irene: What do you mean "there was no way he could"? Right next to him sits a muggleborn student that demonstrated that there is a way. Yes, but Hermione's parents were very open about her going to Hogwarts, got her the books early and left her alone to read them. Harry, on the other hand, because of the interference from the Dursleys, only found out about his magical background and got his letter from Hogwarts the night before he got his books and left for Hogwarts. Maybe if he'd had the time Hermione did he'd have looked through his books too. Irene: >Any example is good enough to demonstrate that it was *possible*. PJ: It is only possible if given the time needed. Harry was not given that time. If he had been then yes, it would've been quite possible though still not probable. :) PJ From belviso at attglobal.net Wed Jan 4 15:54:01 2006 From: belviso at attglobal.net (sistermagpie) Date: Wed, 04 Jan 2006 15:54:01 -0000 Subject: CHAPDISC: HBP7, The Slug Club (Slughorn)/Real Child Abuse In-Reply-To: <20060104133028.87843.qmail@web86208.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 145879 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Irene Mikhlin wrote: > > > --- spaebrun wrote: > > > Reed: > > I don't see Slughorn's character so negative as > > Amanda and several other people > > responding to the Chapterdisc seem to do. > > I don't get all the negativity as well. He invited > Neville to the Slug Club. Neville does not have any > useful connections at present. The only motivation for > Slughorn seems to be Neville's potential to become a > person similar to his parents. > Also, associating with a boy whose family has some > serious feud with Voldemort's supporters seems > careless for someone who's supposed to sit on the > fence. Magpie: Of course Neville does have useful connections. His family appears to be one of the most prominent Pureblood families in the Potterverse, with his grandmother being especially important. That's why he's important. Slughorn seems to drop him after that first meeting when it's clear he doesn't seem to live up to his bloodline. Slughorn isn't sitting on the fence, he's intentionally not allowing any DE kids in his club because he doesn't want contact with DEs. I don't think inviting somebody from a publically anti-Voldemort family is a big deal, particularly when Harry's in the Club. Amiable Dorsai: But that's what started this--perception. It's our (well, my since you don't seem to share it) perception of Draco's belief that he is above other mortals that makes the ferret scene so much fun (for me and Ron, at least:-). After all, he's finally getting the extra consideration that he's always believed a Malfoy is entitled to. Magpie: Oh, well sure I get why the scene plays differently with Draco than it would play with, say, Neville or Ron, sure. But I like to think that the ultimate revelation of Moody's character is meant to change the meaning of the scene in retrospect, since this is the very kind of emotion that Voldemort openly appeals to in followers. He's doing what Death Eaters do. If he'd bounced around a young James Potter I'm sure Snape would have wanted to cherish the memory for always as well for the same reason. -m From vuurdame at xs4all.nl Wed Jan 4 15:54:53 2006 From: vuurdame at xs4all.nl (festuco) Date: Wed, 04 Jan 2006 15:54:53 -0000 Subject: Real child abuse/ESE!lupin questions In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 145880 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "dumbledore11214" wrote: > Pippin: > > The existence of an unidentified Death Eater who "sent" the > > Lestranges to attack the Longbottoms per JKR's website. > > Bella would not take orders from Snape or Peter. JKR says all > > the major characters have been introduced. So who was it? > > Alla: > > Oh, I am sure that we will know the person. My money is on Snape of > course. My question will be how do you know that Bella won't take > Orders from Snape? Do you have any indication of Bella and Snape > relationship during those years? It seems to me that even now, Bella > completely bought Snape as trusted second in command and we SEE that > all DE treat Snape on the Tower with great deference. Did I miss something? I would really appreciate if someone could point me to the canon that indicates the four were -sent- to the Longbottoms. Bella's speach indicates no one else. It could easily be Crouch sr. who said something which Crouch jr. interpreted in this way. Far more logical than either Snape or Lupin, who had no connections to the Aurors at all. Gerry From belviso at attglobal.net Wed Jan 4 16:14:51 2006 From: belviso at attglobal.net (sistermagpie) Date: Wed, 04 Jan 2006 16:14:51 -0000 Subject: Harry and Draco's views of each other WAS: Re: Real child abuse In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 145881 > Alla: > > Harry is always accurate? Of course not, but yes, I do think that > Harry's view of Draco is a great deal more accurate than Draco's > view of Harry. And I think HBP confirmed it splendidly. IMO of > course. Harry knew that Draco is up to something and Draco was up to > very dangerous something. Harry did not know of course that Draco in > the middle of cooking up assassination of the Headmaster realized > that he is not up to the task. Magpie: Harry's knowing Draco was up to something is not the kind of accurate I'm talking about. Draco claimed Harry wasn't the Heir of Slytherin when the whole school thought he was. That's not the kind of accurate I mean either. > Alla: > > Agree as general philosophical proposition. Disagree on specific > application of that general proposition. Harry got Draco's down > as "pureblood bigot", Draco IMO is a pureblood bigot. What is wrong > with Harry's view of Draco here? IMO nothing. Sure, Harry does not > concern himself with the questions why Draco is a bigot, but why > should he? Magpie: "Pureblood bigot" is not the beginning and end to a personality. I think there are good reasons for thinking about the rest of his personality-of anyone's personality. And if you don't you can hardly be an expert on them. > Alla: > > I remember Harry getting special treatment ONCE during six books, > namely receiving a broom stick and getting on the Quidditch team in > his first year, which I cannot even wholeheartedly call special > treatment, because IMO he got on the team because of his talent, not > because of special connections or something. Magpie: Yes, I'm sure that's the way Harry sees it. Sure it's special treatment but for an acceptable reason. Not for the kind of reasons those other people get special treatment, which is totally unfair. So it doesn't count as special treatment when it's Harry. Getting a broom and being on the Quidditch team is special treatment for whatever reason it happened. So is being able to compete in the Triwizard tournament. So is constantly being in the newspaper and having everyone interested in you. Or seeming to have the House Cup Competition results changed to favor you. So is being the Hadmaster's favorite. Or being the center of the entire known universe in which you exist. If you're called "The Chosen One" it's a good sign you might be elevated above other humans in your midst. And Harry is The Chosen One, even if he didn't name himself that. By definition he is very different from all other students. Harry may identify himself as someone who wants or gets no special treatment (except the bad kind which makes his life hard), but being convinced of your own saintlike humility is not the same as not being special. At this point you can't just separate Harry's status from his personality. It's part of who he is. Alla: > While Draco gets on the team during his second year as everybody > should, BUT because his father bought broomsticks for the whole team. Magpie: I think he deserves to be on the team as much as any other Seeker in canon we see and Harry's friends telling themselves that he's only on the team because of his father buying brooms is just as unfair as the Slytherins saying Harry's on the team because he's famous (if they say that--one would hope they'd have just accepted him as a good player when he proved himself to be such, as most of the school seems to have done with Draco). We have plenty of clues that Draco deserves his place on the team. He's a perfectly good player whose father donated sports equipment four years ago. (I can just imagine the way it would be viewed if Draco got a Firebolt third year instead of Harry. If we can get over that, we can get over the Slytherins having new brooms in second year.) > Alla: > > I think that by the end of HBP Harry is already giving a lot more > perspective to Draco than he deserves....but I don't see Harry's view of Draco's "public persona" as being skewed. IMO of course. I think Harry judged well what he saw of Draco, while Draco's judgment of any part of Harry's character is IMO totally skewed. Magpie: So Harry can see Draco as being as an amoeba while not seeing himself as superior to anyone. I don't think Draco's view of Harry is *as* skewed as Harry thinks it is (and it might be agreed upon in some ways by people closer to Harry). I don't think Harry's view of Draco as a total person is completely accurate and I think both boys project things they don't want to face in themselves onto the other. The descriptions of Harry here hint at a different character than I see in the books, so we seem to be sort of trying to have two different conversations with neither of us interested in the one the other one is having. -m From willsonkmom at msn.com Wed Jan 4 17:22:21 2006 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Wed, 04 Jan 2006 17:22:21 -0000 Subject: DD and Godric's Hollow (Long) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 145882 > SSSusan: > Ahem. Jen, Potioncat, Kaylee, other crewmates on the DRIBBLE > SHADOWS* -- 'tis tooting our own horn time! ;-) IOW, time to > resurrect our theory of what happened in the "missing 24 hours." Potioncat hurries to Captain SSSusan's side and delivers a smart salute....unfortunately it's with the hand holding a margarita and both of them are sloshed with the sticky lime beverage. "Do you have anything to report?" asks the Captain. "Yes, I think we should stop drinking margaritas." "Obviously." "I mean, it's way too cold. Buttered rum, spiked hot chocolate...something like that." > "As I was saying," SSSusan repeated: > Some of us believe that DD may have used that time to "shore up" the > protections on Harry, not believing Voldy to be fully gone for all > time. It's my contention that DD, Hagrid & Snape worked together to > apply a protective potion/ointment containing dragon blood onto baby > Harry during those 24 hours. Potioncat: All this dragon stuff is getting to me. The idea that Snape is a lot like a Hebridean Black Dragon has come up. And there's Harry's dreams of people turning into Snape. In HBP he dreams that Draco turns into Slughorn turns into Snape. In SS/PS he dreamed about Draco turning into Snape who sort of turned into LV. In Occlumency lessons he sees a black dragon, although it isn't called a Horntail and it isn't in order. It's between looking at Snape and seeing his parents. What if Draco in his dream isn't Draco Malfoy but (Draco)Dragon. Slughorn has dragon blood. We see it very early in the HBP. Lily was, if Slughorn was correct, a gifted potion maker. Was she working on something with dragon blood? Captain SSSusan frowns, "Was any of this supposed to support DRIBBLE SHADOWS?" "Yes, I want to be helpful," Potioncat answers. "Well then, go brew some Irish coffee," SSSusan sighes, "We're going to need it. "Yes, Ma'am! And where did you leave the post about DRIBBLE SHADOWS?" > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/128717 Potioncat From agdisney at msn.com Wed Jan 4 17:29:50 2006 From: agdisney at msn.com (Andrea Grevera) Date: Wed, 4 Jan 2006 12:29:50 -0500 Subject: Fw: [HPforGrownups] Spinners End Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 145883 Andie: Sorry, forgot to sign the post. I'm re-re-re-reading HBP again and two things keep coming up in this chapter. Pg. 24 Scholastic Snape held up a hand to stop her, then pointed his wand again at the concealed staircase door. There was a loud bang and a squeal, followed by the sound of Wormtail scurrying back up the stairs. "My apologies," said Snape. "He has lately taken to listening at doors, I don't know what he means by it... Who else has been visiting Snape that Wormtail has been listening in on? And, when Snape returns to Hogwarts for the school year, where does Wormatil go? I don't see Snape or LV leaving Wormtail in the house alone. Is he shipped off to another DE, or back to LV? I don't see how leaving him in a Muggle neighborhood by himself would be a good idea. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From dossett at lds.net Wed Jan 4 17:54:18 2006 From: dossett at lds.net (rtbthw_mom) Date: Wed, 04 Jan 2006 17:54:18 -0000 Subject: Who was with Voldemort at GH? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 145884 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "juli17ptf" wrote: (I've frequently > wondered how Harry remained alive and safe inside the house if it was > completely destroyed by the failed AK.) > Pat here: I've always assumed that it was the ability of magical children to do magic before being trained - as in, Harry re-growing his hair, shrinking Dudley's old sweater, etc. - that saved Harry: he did it himself. Of course, it's also possible that somebody else who was already there had something to do with it! (sorry to be so behind in posting this - I got behind in reading over the holidays.) From miles at martinbraeutigam.de Wed Jan 4 18:03:08 2006 From: miles at martinbraeutigam.de (Miles) Date: Wed, 4 Jan 2006 19:03:08 +0100 Subject: First potions lesson/Stand aside girl and the end References: Message-ID: <011d01c61159$1f1d1900$14b2a8c0@rechnerchen> No: HPFGUIDX 145885 kchuplis wrote: > Are *any* of you telling me that you could have done this? I'm no > idiot. I have an MFA > and a fairly high IQ and I can guarantee you that I could not have > done that at 11 or 21 or now. That's just silly. To be honest, if > that was reasonable, there would be little > or no need for school at all. To accuse JKR of character > inconsistancy is ludicris, IMO. Miles: I don't think you got the point here. No, Snape's questions are not reasonable, they wouldn't be for any ordinary student at Hogwarts. But - stop. He did not ask an ordinary student, he asked Harry Potter, didn't he? Remember the Sorting Ceremony? When Harry was sorted into Gryffindor, their table exploded in "We have Potter"-cheers. They did *not* expect him to be just another 11year old muggle-raised boy, they thought "now Slytherin, be aware, seven House Championships are enough" (this is only my interpretation, but facing the House rivalry Gryff/Slyth, I see it as a probable interpretation). So, for Snape there was the new Gryffindor hero, moreover the hero of the entire wizarding world. For him as Slytherin HoH he was "the enemy". Remember Sprouts reaction when Harry was chosen as the fourth Champion in GoF, stealing "her" Hufflepuff Champion's limelight? Snape is a much more displeasing person than Sprout, and he doesn't know Harry. He only knew his fame, I do not think he knew of his family situation (that Harry is abused by the Dursleys) and that he had no chance to prepare anything for Hogwarts, and he knows that he looks like his arrogant father. What does he do from his own PoV? He thinks he just pulls a show-off back to the ground, puts Harry back in his place: as just another student. Yes, he is unfair. He is extremely unfair, because we know very much that Snape didn't know (and still doesn't know at the end of HBP). From Snape's PoV - yes, still unfair, but at least understandable. And to show the other students that Harry may be chosen, but that he is just a muggle-raised boy and no genius - there could have been worse things to happen to him. Miles From foxmoth at qnet.com Wed Jan 4 18:08:33 2006 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Wed, 04 Jan 2006 18:08:33 -0000 Subject: Real child abuse/ESE!lupin questions In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 145886 > > Pippin: > > > The existence of an unidentified Death Eater who "sent" the > > > Lestranges to attack the Longbottoms per JKR's website. > > > Bella would not take orders from Snape or Peter. JKR says all > > > the major characters have been introduced. So who was it? > > > > Alla: > > > > Oh, I am sure that we will know the person. My money is on Snape of > > course. My question will be how do you know that Bella won't take > > Orders from Snape? Do you have any indication of Bella and Snape > > relationship during those years? It seems to me that even now, Bella > > completely bought Snape as trusted second in command and we SEE that > > all DE treat Snape on the Tower with great deference. Gerry: Did I miss something? I would really appreciate if someone could point > me to the canon that indicates the four were -sent- to the > Longbottoms. Bella's speach indicates no one else. It could easily be > Crouch sr. who said something which Crouch jr. interpreted in this > way. Far more logical than either Snape or Lupin, who had no > connections to the Aurors at all. Pippin: It's from the rumours section of the JKR website http://www.jkrowling.com/textonly/en/rumours_view.cfm?id=25 The Lestranges were sent after Neville to kill him No, they weren't, they were very definitely sent after Neville's parents. I can't say too much about this because it touches too closely on the prophecy and how many people knew about it, but the Lestranges were not in on the secret. ---- Bella certainly doesn't trust Snape at their meeting in Spinner's End. It's clear she hasn't had a chance to question him since LV lost power, so how could she have been taking orders from him in the interim? Why would she accuse him of doing nothing to find LV if he'd been involved in the plot against the Longbottoms? If she'd been closely associated with Snape prior to Azkaban wouldn't she have blabbed enough to let Sirius know Snape was a DE? Amiable Dorsai: And what a powerfully useful addition to Voldemort's ranks Remus must be! Imagine having the cool nerve, the incredible aim, and the split second timing needed to hex Sirius from a distance--with a spell that leaves a visible trail between the caster and the target--in front of Harry, Neville, Dumbledore and Kingsley, (I think that completes the list of good guys, saving Sirius himself, who were conscious at the time) and not have any of them notice! Wandlessly! Pippin: I think you will find that Dumbledore was looking away, Kingsley was behind the dais, and Harry and Neville were behind Lupin. So the only good guy in a position to observe the visible trail between the caster and its target was Sirius -- and he did look surprised. Still you have a point -- it was too daring and desperate an act for a casual killing, plus we have JKR's assurance that Sirius died for a reason. But here we must leave the solid footing of unassailable canon and pursue that flighty temptress speculation. Most likely, Sirius died because he knew too much. But what? Sirius calls out to Harry to take the prophecy and run. If he saw it in Harry's hand, what need to tell him to take it? But if not, how would he think that Harry knew what he was talking about? Snape and Dumbledore know that Harry hasn't a clue what the prophecy is or how to recognize it. The Death Eaters don't know that. According to Lucius, they assumed that Dumbledore would have told Harry all about it. So who could have conveyed that assumption to Sirius? Only a Death Eater -- and not Snape. Alla: Right, OK the majority of the reasons you brought up I think are simply plot related reasons or I have some very fundamental meta disagreements with them, so I won't even talk about them, but I wish you would clarify some of them. Such as this one - Lupin also suspected that Sirius was a spy, right? Do you categorize Sirius as one of DE also? Pippin: I don't see the relevance. If Lupin was mistaken about Sirius, does that somehow imply that Sirius was mistaken about Lupin? Pippin: > his identification of the werewolves as his "equals" Alla: And they are not? No, seriously how does this point out to Lupin's hidden allegiance? Pippin: > his grievance against Umbridge Alla: Same question here. Pippin: Lupin has always been susceptible to pressure from his peer group. He now sees the werewolves as his peers, his fellows and equals, and they have a common enemy in Umbridge. The werewolves are mostly on Voldemort's side. So there would be pressure on Lupin to go along, and if his conscience complained about it, he has a long history of not listening. Pippin: > the intractable nature of the werewolf problem Alla: Sorry, don't have my dictionary handy. Is intractable a synonym to incurable? If yes, do you mean that Lupin went to Voldemort hoping that Voldemort will cure him or do you mean something different? Pippin: "Intractable" means "difficult to manage or govern." When used of conflicts, it means they can't be readily resolved by negotiation or mediation. Neither side feels it can offer a compromise the other side would accept. The wizards won't compromise on their childrens' safety, the werewolves won't compromise with the wizards who've deprived them of their rights. The temptation is to resort to force, and Voldemort is far more amenable to the use of force than Dumbledore. Pippin From rdoliver30 at yahoo.com Wed Jan 4 15:32:02 2006 From: rdoliver30 at yahoo.com (lupinlore) Date: Wed, 04 Jan 2006 15:32:02 -0000 Subject: JKR is a Death Eater? (was:Re: Hobbsian worlds; Crime & Punishment) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 145887 BetsyHp wrote: > The very fact that JKR sets up as her worst villains people > espousing bias and prejudice, the very fact that her main good > guy actively works against the bias and prejudice of his world > suggests to me that I'm not merrily wandering down a garden > path. Book 7 will be the deciding factor of course. But I for > one will be shocked if JKR turns out to be ESE. Depends on what JKR sees as bias and prejudice. One person's prejudice is another's realism, one person's bias is another's ability to clearly see human nature. Also depends on what you define as ESE. I'll have to say that if JKR really wanted to show us a classical "liberal" scenario, she missed a golden opportunity with Voldy's backstory. Do we find great moral struggles, human emotion, and sympathetic portrayal in the Fall of Tom Riddle? Nope. Kid was born evil, strange even as a baby, snake in the bosom of Hogwarts, DD never trusted him, yada, yada, yada. I think that JKR actually gives less thought to these issues than people believe. I think she's concerned by her story, with philosophical and religious issues mostly serving as the unstated foundation. That is why people find these things contradictory and unclear in the Potterverse. People's basic outlooks on life and morality often are unclear and contradictory. I think JKR probably laughed out loud when she wrote the ferret sequence and the ten-ton-tongue scene. She probably also felt genuine sympathy with Dudley when faced with dementors and for Draco in the bathroom scene. Such contradictory messages often aren't even very subtle in canon or even in JKR's interviews. We have a headmaster who loudly proclaims his care for his students yet seems willing to let Draco go on with his bumbling activities that almost kill two of said beloved students. We have an emphasis on choice and a villain who was born evil, the product of a degenerate and poisoned bloodline. We have denunciation of race-prejudice and important and ancient magic that validates, in a way, the emphasis the DEs place on ancestry and blood ties. And we have a writer who seemed shocked and surprised when asked why Slytherin House still exists but who has persistantly shown Slytherin House as being the nerve center and home of Voldemort's supporters at Hogwarts. Or was I the only one who read that statement about how the DEs would have supporters in all houses and how Draco and his gang are only a small portion of Slytherin and thought: "Okay, it would have been nice to show us that before now, you know, instead of having to tell us at the eleventh hour in an interview. Now if you do show us any of that it will have the inevitable feel of box-checking." It all comes back to the fact that JKR is, I think, sometimes rather naive about the messages she sends precisely BECAUSE she's usually focused on the story and doesn't consider as much as she maybe should the "wider" implications of some of her plot points. All of which is to say I don't think we'll have a clear and unconflicted statement on these issues in Book VII -- if only because it's very late in the day to go into the complexities of all this. We may very well see some nod at House Unity or Good Slytherins, but a nod is about all we have time for. Check the box and move on to the Great Horcrux Hunt. Lupinlore From rdoliver30 at yahoo.com Wed Jan 4 15:46:29 2006 From: rdoliver30 at yahoo.com (lupinlore) Date: Wed, 04 Jan 2006 15:46:29 -0000 Subject: Real child abuse In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 145888 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Jim Ferer" wrote: > > It is not Harry's birth, family, or wealth that Dumbledore admires, > it's Harry himself. And why should he not? Dumbledore believes Harry > has earned this esteem. I agree. JKR seems to believe that courage > and loyalty earn merit, and she's right. And, it pleases me that the > former headmasters don't speak like bureaucrats. Sure. But there is difference between admiring someone for who they are and admiring someone for what they have done -- even though what they do manifestly flows from who they are. Dumbledore himself admits this when he notes that "Our choices reveal who we are," -- not, as he is often claimed to have said, "Our choices determine who we are." Dumbledore praises Harry because -- well, first of all he loves the kid and therefore will praise him in any case. But also because Harry is a good person. Not because Harry has slain a basilisk or won a tournament or even because Harry has saved someone's life. He finds Harry miraculous not because of what Harry does but because of the type of person Harry is. Indeed, JKR has hinted at this when she talked about Dumbledore's attitude toward Harry and Neville. That is, she has said that Voldemort chose Harry because he thought Harry would be the one who could threaten him, not Neville. JKR has informed us that, although he of course doesn't come out and say this, Dumbledore agrees that Voldemort judged correctly between the two boys, even if they were only a year old at the time. Lupinlore From kmruddell at yahoo.com Wed Jan 4 15:54:14 2006 From: kmruddell at yahoo.com (katydid3626) Date: Wed, 04 Jan 2006 15:54:14 -0000 Subject: RAB's identity and significance / Sirius' father In-Reply-To: <20060104123159.14011.qmail@web25312.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 145889 > > katydid wrote: > > What does anyone know about Sirius Blacks' father? > Becky: > In OotP, Sirius said that Kreacher 'wasn't quite as > devoted to his father as his mother' which makes me think he > wasn't quite as unpleasant as she was. Perhaps he stole the > horcrux as revenge for LV killing his youngest son. > > JKR said that RAB being Regulus Black was a 'fine guess' but > that doesn't mean it was correct, maybe just close. katydid again: Yes! That's exactly what I have been thinking. Especially if he was initially a supporter of Voldemort. The loss of his son may have turned him. I kept wondering throughout HBP where the pictures/memorabilia etc of Mr. Black were...but as I said, I cannot find much about him, no name on the tapestry that we are given, or anything else. Of course, it could mean nothing, but I just found it odd. From coverton at netscape.com Wed Jan 4 16:00:09 2006 From: coverton at netscape.com (Corey Overton) Date: Wed, 4 Jan 2006 10:00:09 -0600 Subject: Veela characteristics (RE: comic relief for book 7) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <000101c61147$f34df300$77e5aeac@Overton> No: HPFGUIDX 145890 Allie: > It only just occurred to me who else will be at the Weasley > wedding besides the trio & the Weasleys- VEELA! > > On a related topic, we saw Veela transform into ugly fire- > throwing beasts at the Quidditch World Cup. Fleur is only > part Veela, but do you think she might have any of those > abilities in her somewhere, or that it would be significant? > (Hagrid is only part giant, but he has some of their > characteristics such as thick, hex-resistant skin.) Corey here. Allie couldn't agree with you more. I think Fleur would have those characteristics. Don't see why she wouldn't; besides it gives her one more way to fight the DEs if need be. Oh and another thing -- if she got mad at someone that might come out in her as well. Your fellow list member, Corey From coverton at netscape.com Wed Jan 4 17:58:20 2006 From: coverton at netscape.com (Corey Overton) Date: Wed, 4 Jan 2006 11:58:20 -0600 Subject: is Dumbledore dead? (was Re: RAB's identity and significance , etc.) In-Reply-To: <155.5e8f447e.30ec983b@aol.com> Message-ID: <000001c61158$7918cae0$77e5aeac@Overton> No: HPFGUIDX 145891 > Corey, > Mrs. Heater, your fellow member, disagrees that DD will > not return in any form. Would he be the only former > headmaster not to have his likeness milling about in a > portrait in what is now (hopefully) McGonagall's office? Hi Mrs. Heater. I think Dumbledore's portrait will be there but I don't think he'll help Harry any more than he has already. I think he'll be just like the other portraits there to help McGonagall. Well, let me know what you think. Your fellow member, Corey From MercuryBlue144 at aol.com Wed Jan 4 18:38:15 2006 From: MercuryBlue144 at aol.com (mercurybluesmng) Date: Wed, 04 Jan 2006 18:38:15 -0000 Subject: Symbols & Name Meanings In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 145892 > Bruce > If Slytherin is the Water Master, why is his relic a Ring (that is, a gem), > which is an Earth symbol? MercuryBlue: It's not. The ring is engraved with the coat of arms of the Peverells, an old, rich, and apparently extinct pureblood family, which may or may not be descended from Slytherin himself. The Slytherin artifact is Merope's locket. I'll let the experts speculate on the symbolism of that, though I suspect that the locket was a birthday gift from Salazar to his wife, or some such thing. From rlai1977 at yahoo.com Wed Jan 4 18:44:19 2006 From: rlai1977 at yahoo.com (rlai1977) Date: Wed, 04 Jan 2006 18:44:19 -0000 Subject: RAB's identity and significance / Sirius' father In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 145893 > katydid again: > Especially if he was initially a supporter of Voldemort. > The loss of his son may have turned him. > > I kept wondering throughout HBP where the pictures/memorabilia > etc of Mr. Black were...but as I said, I cannot find much about > him, no name on the tapestry that we are given, or anything else. > Of course, it could mean nothing, but I just found it odd. We also did not have a portrait of Regulus though... I rather suspect Mrs. Black was the most 'vocal' amongst the family, and still believe it's more possible that Regulus, who had been mentioned a couple of times by now was indeed RAB. The reason Regulus's dad was not talked about at all might exactly be because he would play no significant role in the 7th book? RP From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Wed Jan 4 18:55:12 2006 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Wed, 04 Jan 2006 18:55:12 -0000 Subject: First Potions lesson In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 145894 Potioncat wrote: > There is so much happening in this first Potions class, I don't really know where to begin, so I'll start with canon: > > "Thought you wouldn't open a book before coming, eh, Potter?" > Harry forced himself to keep looking straight into those cold dark > eyes. He *had* looked through his books at the Dursleys', but did Snape expect him to remember everything in *One Thousand Magical Herbs and Fungi*?" > > (That was just to counter the arguments that Harry couldn't look at his books. He did look them over. Snape might expect him to remember > everything, I wouldn't.) Carol responds: Setting aside Snape and his motivations for the moment (I'll return to them), this quote shows something rather odd about Harry: He seems to be confusing what is surely his Herbology textbook, "One Thousand Magical Herbs and Fungi," with his Potions textbook, which we're told earlier is "Magical Drafts and Potions" by Arsenius Jigger (SS Am. ed. 66). If Harry has looked through his textbooks, as the narrator indicates, surely he should know which book is for which class. Is this a Flint, or is JKR emphasizing Harry's ignorance of the WW by having him think that he'd find out what a bezoar is by looking at a book on plants? > Potioncat wrote: > We don't really know Snape's motivation in the first class. Prior to this class, on the first page of the chapter,we're given a description of Harry's celebrity. He is getting lots of attention from students and teachers. So, Snape knows Harry Potter is a celebrity. Harry knows it too. > > Snape . . . may expect Harry to be just like his father (as do many others). We know James didn't always study and was a big hero/celebrity, which he seemed to enjoy. > (IMHO, OoP) So perhaps that is what Snape is expecting Harry to be like. Carol responds: Right. And Snape also knows that some of the DEs think that Harry may be a new Dark Wizard to rally around (paraphrasing his remark to Bella in "Spinner's End"). IMO, it's his duty (at least in his own view) to find out whether this is true and to dispel any rumors among his Slytherin students that this is the case. It's important to remember that Harry's Potions class contains not one but four children of Death Eaters. It's entirely possible that Snape would have treated Harry differently if the Potions class contained only Gryffindors, or Gryffindors and Ravenclaws or Hufflepuffs. Whatever he says and does will be witnessed by Draco (and Theo--I'm not counting the thugs C and G) and just possibly reported back to their fathers. So Snape can't be seen buddying up to Harry and Co. and he has to maintain his reputation as favoring the Slytherins, but more important, he has to disabuse them of the notion (if it hasn't already been destroyed by his being sorted into Gryffindor) that this boy is one of them. Also, IMO, he's operating on the assumption (expressed by DD to McGonagall in another scene as a motive--though not his real or main motive--for placing Harry at the Dursleys') that the Prophecy boy should not be a "pampered little prince." He must not, IOW, be a second James, arrogant and egocentric. He would be in extreme danger from Voldemort if he thought too highly of his own powers, and if he had a following like Cedric's or Krum's in a later book, it would be very hard for him to have anything other than a swelled head. So Snape in revealing Harry's ignorance of bezoars and aconite and the Draught of Living Death shows both the Slytherins and the Gryffindors that Harry knows no more than they do (and less than Hermione). Is this kind or fair to Harry? No (though preventing the formation of a herd of Colin Creevey-style groupies is doing Harry a perhaps unintended favor). But it isn't abuse and it has important consequences for his relationship with both the Slytherins and the Gryffindors. Potioncat responds: > Snape knows something of the prophesy, knows that LV did something to Harry. He may have sensed something of LV in Harry, as the Sorting Hat did, and as Trelawney seems to (without knowing it). So Snape may be trying to ferret out signs of the Dark Lord. Carol responds: I agree. We see in CoS that Snape isn't entirely sure that Harry didn't petrify Mrs. Norris, and he may have had Draco cast Serpensortia rather than some other curse to find out whether Harry, like Voldemort, had some sort of affinity with snakes. And when he finds out that Harry can speak Parseltongue and Harry sees that shrewd, calculating look on his face, it's clear that his suspicions have been confirmed. He's not yet sure whether Harry is a budding Dark Lord, but it's clear that he shares a very rare power with LV that must have resulted from a transfer of powers at GH. (Almost certainly he went to DD immediately with this information/inference, as DD presents the same idea to Harry at the end of the book.) > Potioncat wrote: > It may be a combination of both, and he's trying to scare Harry into paying attention. Is it a good way to start off teaching 11 year old kids. Nope. Carol responds: Maybe. It certainly seems like something other than coincidence that the first thing he asks Harry about is a bezoar (a near-universal antidote as important to DADA as to Potions and very important in dealing with Dark Wizards who may want to get rid of you). Possibly he hoped the lesson would be memorable (and reading the HBP's Potions notes does jog his memory of this lesson--the content, not the experience of being humiliated--luckily for Ron.) So, regardless of Snape's intentions, Harry does benefit in several ways from this lesson. The Slytherins see him as neither a standard to rally around nor a threat to their DE fathers, the Gryffindors see him as an ordinary kid like themselves and someone they can sympathize or empathize with (rather than a celebrity to idolize), Harry himself is prevented from becoming arrogant and self-important like James (maybe he wouldn't have done so anyway, but Snape can't know that), and he's introduced to bezoars, which will prove extremely important later. Does all this make Snape a nice, fair teacher? No, of course not. But it doesn't make him an abuser, either. Harry suffers no lasting damage from the lesson (though it does form a first step in his antagonistic relationship with Snape). If I'm right, Snape is operating as Dumbledore's Man here (and in many other places), insuring that Harry will be able to perform his role as Voldemort's nemesis when the time comes without regard for anything so frivolous (in his view) as a student's feelings. And he's also maintaining his cover among the Slytherins as a DE who walked free, insuring their respect for him, which would be lost if he treated the Boy Who Lived (and unwittingly vaporized Voldemort) as in any way special. Let them think Harry is mediocre--and let Harry think that's what Snape thinks, too. Carol, courteously requesting that she not be thrown to the lions for this one From vuurdame at xs4all.nl Wed Jan 4 19:19:36 2006 From: vuurdame at xs4all.nl (festuco) Date: Wed, 04 Jan 2006 19:19:36 -0000 Subject: Real child abuse/ESE!lupin questions In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 145895 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "pippin_999" wrote: > Pippin: > It's from the rumours section of the JKR website > http://www.jkrowling.com/textonly/en/rumours_view.cfm?id=25 > > The Lestranges were sent after Neville to kill him > > No, they weren't, they were very definitely sent after Neville's parents. Thanks. But why do you think Lupin would be a likely candidate? I still think Crouch Jr. would be the logical one to make such assumptions, as he has a connection to the right department. Gerry From vuurdame at xs4all.nl Wed Jan 4 19:20:33 2006 From: vuurdame at xs4all.nl (festuco) Date: Wed, 04 Jan 2006 19:20:33 -0000 Subject: Real child abuse/ESE!lupin questions In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 145896 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "pippin_999" wrote: > Pippin: > It's from the rumours section of the JKR website > http://www.jkrowling.com/textonly/en/rumours_view.cfm?id=25 > > The Lestranges were sent after Neville to kill him > > No, they weren't, they were very definitely sent after Neville's parents. Thanks. But why do you think Lupin would be a likely candidate? I still think Crouch Jr. would be the logical one to make such assumptions, as he has a connection to the right department. Gerry From gilchristm at juno.com Wed Jan 4 19:37:34 2006 From: gilchristm at juno.com (Martha) Date: Wed, 04 Jan 2006 19:37:34 -0000 Subject: Dumbledore's portrait Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 145897 Hello, I'm new here so apologize if this has been addressed before... You know that there are pictures in the wizarding world that move (Chocolate frog cards, pictures in the newspaper, photographs), and those are not necesarily of people who are dead. Isn't it possible that Dumbledore made a picture of himself and placed it in the portrait location in the headmaster's office? This would eliminate the portrait from the pool of evidence about Dumbledore being dead. Martha From kelleyaynn at yahoo.com Wed Jan 4 20:06:31 2006 From: kelleyaynn at yahoo.com (kelleyaynn) Date: Wed, 04 Jan 2006 20:06:31 -0000 Subject: First potions lesson/Stand aside girl and the end In-Reply-To: <20060104134634.91237.qmail@web86209.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 145898 I've never said it was reasonable, merely that it was > not impossible. Surely I can't be the only one who > understands that the difference between "very > difficult" and "impossible" is huge? > > Hermione is exceptional, yes, but her existance is > enough to prove it's not impossible. > Kelleyaynn: As a teacher, I don't EXPECT my students to automatically be able to do something that is "very difficult". So why should Snape? > Could *I* have done this? Not now, but I'm quite > confident that I could at 11. > Kelleyaynn: I teach 11 year olds, and as I teach in a private school, they are generally more capable as a whole than the students in public schools. I can't imagine many of my 11 year olds could remember all of the information in several text books, even if they had a month to read them. AND that's given that they are allowed to spend as much time as they want reading, which I doubt Harry had. He may have wanted to learn as much about the magical world as possible, but I doubt he was given the opportunity. In addition, he had no idea what the magical world was like. How could he possibly know what information in the textbooks was most important or might be most useful? Kelleyaynn From ornawn at 013.net Wed Jan 4 20:46:48 2006 From: ornawn at 013.net (ornadv) Date: Wed, 04 Jan 2006 20:46:48 -0000 Subject: "Stand aside, girl" and the End Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 145899 >Carol >Lily, however, was not armed and did not offer to fight. She was >only, quite literally, standing in LV's way, "foolishly" blocking >his path to his intended target. Orna: I don't think she wasn't armed ? she surely had her wand. I suppose that she didn't fight because Harry was there, and she would be afraid to start sending spells - after all a baby could be seriously hurt, even by "innocent" spells. It seems she tried to talk with Voldemort, speak to his better human core perhaps that explains also his wording ? it would sound extremely silly in his ears. Now for Voldemort ? perhaps he didn't kill her right away ? because she stood in front of Harry ? and he didn't want to risk hurting Harry and not killing him "neatly". Perhaps he wanted Lily to stay alive- just to interrogate her about Harry. After all, he should be curious of what made this baby special enough to endanger the "greatest Dark Wizard. And now for the joking option ? perhaps he wanted Lily for himself ? not because of Love, but precisely because of this ? a genetic upgrade ? the greatest wizard, and the witch who bared an equal opponent - what a wonderful heir was to be expected. (Don't think he would insist on a traditional marriage ceremony) Orna, running for the nearest unplottable room From ornawn at 013.net Wed Jan 4 21:04:37 2006 From: ornawn at 013.net (ornadv) Date: Wed, 04 Jan 2006 21:04:37 -0000 Subject: First Potions lesson Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 145901 >"hartsonthemove" >Hermione has a family dynamic that ALLOWS her to read and >possibly encourages her to read and be the best witch possible >once she receives her owl announcing her acceptance to Hogwarts. >Harry, on the other hand, does NOT have that same home >environment. How on earth can you possibly think that after all >the hullabaloo over the owls and letters that Vernon would ever >allow him to crack a single book of that "dreadful" subject???? Orna: I don't think so ? not on earth. I just said that Snape, who probably hadn't any information of how Harry spent his first 11 years, could assume that he was raised in a family glorifying his parents, and allowing him to read books. And he might assume Harry had a natural talent for potions - like his mother. Again, I do think Snape picked on Harry and don't approve of it ? I was just trying to say, he is a nasty person in general, and he might have been curious about Harry's abilities. He had no way of knowing what the Dursleys were like. Average normal parents, would have enabled Harry to come much more prepared. So asking him (in a civil way) ? wouldn't be totally unexpected. Slughorn does it, just the same ? only with a more benign nature. But had Harry disappointed him (as Neville did, and as Harry would have done without the HBP ), he would be quite nasty ? ignoring him in future. Another point ? in Spinner's end we see Snape surrounded by a lot of books ? and from HBP, we can imagine him to be quite a book-worm, doing experiments in magic. From his POV, it would be a basic standard from a boy, who has remarkable magic powers to know more about magic than Harry does. After all, Voldemort had quite a remarkable control over magic at this age, and Harry is supposed to equal him. >Carol responds: >I agree. We see in CoS that Snape isn't entirely sure that Harry >didn't petrify Mrs. Norris, and he may have had Draco cast >Serpensortia rather than some other curse to find out whether Harry, >like Voldemort, had some sort of affinity with snakes. Orna: Agree. That's what I'm trying to say ? Snape was and is trying to understand Harry's power ? after all he heard the prophecy, and should be quite curious. The more he comes to know Harry the less powerful he looks ? not a natural potion-brewer, like his mother, not a model-student - like Hermione, as Harry himself says in GoF ? his best talent is to fly a broom ? wonderful talent for fighting Voldemort. And of course - immediately reminding Snape of arrogant nasty James, from his POV. Orna From gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk Wed Jan 4 21:14:00 2006 From: gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk (Geoff Bannister) Date: Wed, 04 Jan 2006 21:14:00 -0000 Subject: Moralising and preaching/Loose ends in Book 7 In-Reply-To: <01d701c610d2$e5971c20$14b2a8c0@rechnerchen> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 145902 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Miles" wrote: Geoff: > > To take a real life example, > > I moved from London to the West Country 11 years or so ago. > > I could cite a page > > full of real loose ends which have remained unravelled through my > > life. > > So with fiction. > > So, if Jo Rowling leaves a few loose ends around, it will be no worse > > than real life or what other writers have done. For answers, you can > > probably consult the fanfic sites. :-) > > Miles: > I disagree with this. Yes, obviously it is not possible not to leave some > loose ends in a series like Harry Potter, or in Lord of the Rings. If the > authors would try to unravel or interweave all loose ends, the end of their > books would be pretty boring. > But I don't think that we can compare it to real life. Fiction is Fiction, > so it is inventend from the first to the last word. All the threads an > author brings into his universe should have a purpose (even if they are only > decoration), but the main threads should have an end that at least relates > to the other ends. If they are not, I doubt a series like Harry Potter could > be good literature. This is not a short story. Geoff: Permit me to disagree with you in turn. If I read a story in which all the loose ends are tied up, it always seems to me as being too neat and too "clever". I agree that Jo Rowling is the creator of her own particular universe which has many of us in its vice-like grip, and she has a perfect right to treat that universe as she wishes. But it is not her style to tidy everything up neatly. The world of Harry Potter parallels our real world and interacts with it and, in so doing, I believe it leaves unfinished and unknowable bits and pieces strewn along the way. There are a myriad of odd facts which we do not know, probably not germane to the main story. For example: when did the Flamels actually die?; how did Moody come to have his magic eye?; how did Voldemort get to Albania after the Godrics Hollow and Philosopher's Stone incidents when he was disembodied? No, as I said in a previous post, there will always be situations in our own lives where we ask ourselves "I wonder what happened to..." And there have got to be after Book 7 because otherwise there will be several hundred members of this group and similar ones who are picking over the bones of the story's end and have no loose ends to speculate over ad infinitum and ad nauseum :-) Imagine the shock and horror: "Close the shutters and bolt the doors, guys, HPFGU is closing down". From newbrigid at yahoo.com Wed Jan 4 19:47:30 2006 From: newbrigid at yahoo.com (Lia) Date: Wed, 04 Jan 2006 19:47:30 -0000 Subject: Who was with Voldemort at GH? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 145903 Pat said: I've always assumed that it was the ability of magical children to do magic before being trained - as in, Harry re-growing his hair, shrinking Dudley's old sweater, etc. - that saved Harry: he did it himself. Of course, it's also possible that somebody else who was already there had something to do with it! (sorry to be so behind in posting this - I got behind in reading over the holidays.) Lia replies: Pat, I think, at the risk of being quite tongue-in-cheek, that you are referencing what is commonly called the "Charmed Phenomenon", a condition, albeit a helpful one, possessed by children of witches which enables them to protect themselves seemingly at will (often with a shield of sorts), although it is actually a reflex. Hence, these children often perform magic without truly intending to do so. The "slang name" derives from the television show of similar name. Seriously--as opposed to Siriusly--you bring up an interesting point. The question of who accompanied LV is one that's pestered me for some time. For some reason, I had always assumed (dangerous to do) that Voldemort was alone. LV often acts alone, and is depicted in many ways throughout the canon as solitary, even when surrounded by others. Your "self-protection" theory would serve to bolster my assumption. It's a good, sensible theory. Still, others have raised the issue of accompaniment, and it would seem that someone else might have been there. My guess here would be either Snape or Bellatrix--because it would explain the actions and behavior of either in later events. (e.g., Snape's "re-allegiance", Bellatrix's claims of closeness to LV, and so forth). However, the introduction of RAB--whomever that may be, Regulus or otherwise--may indicate a different person altogether. Do I sound confused? I am, truly, of many minds on this topic. I have changed viewpoints about 50 times, methinks. --Lia, currently bemused, befuddled, and bewitched From gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk Wed Jan 4 21:19:05 2006 From: gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk (Geoff Bannister) Date: Wed, 04 Jan 2006 21:19:05 -0000 Subject: Dumbledore's portrait In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 145904 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Martha" wrote: Martha: > Hello, > I'm new here so apologize if this has been addressed before... You > know that there are pictures in the wizarding world that move > (Chocolate frog cards, pictures in the newspaper, photographs), and > those are not necesarily of people who are dead. Isn't it possible > that Dumbledore made a picture of himself and placed it in the > portrait location in the headmaster's office? This would eliminate > the portrait from the pool of evidence about Dumbledore being dead. Geoff: That's an interesting new slant on things, however, canon says: 'In silence they ascended the moving spiral staircase and entered he circular office. He did not know what he had expected: that the room would be draped in black, perhaps, or even that Dumbledore's body might be lying there. In fact, it looked almost exactly as it had done when he and Dumbledore had left it mere hours previously: the silver instruments whirring and puffing on their spindle-legged tables, Gryffindor's sword in its glass case gleaming in the moonlight, the Sorting Hat on a shelf behind the desk. But Fawkes' perch stood empty; he was still crying his lament to the grounds. And a new portrait had joined the ranks of the dead headmasters and headmistresses of Hogwarts... Dumbledore was slumbering in a golden frame over the desk, his half-moon spectacles perched upon his crooked nose, looking peaceful and untroubled.' (HBP "the Phoenix Lament" pp.583-84 UK edition) However the portrait got on the wall, Dumbledore didn't place it there. It had appeared since the two of them left and Dumbledore had not returned there. Maybe a portrait is painted and stored in the school somewhere and the magic of Hogwarts kicks in when the head teacher involved dies. From rstiegel at yahoo.com Wed Jan 4 19:46:19 2006 From: rstiegel at yahoo.com (Rachael) Date: Wed, 04 Jan 2006 19:46:19 -0000 Subject: Spinners End In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 145905 agdisney wrote: > > Who else has been visiting Snape that Wormtail has been listening > in on? > > And, when Snape returns to Hogwarts for the school year, where > does Wormatil go? I don't see Snape or LV leaving Wormtail in > the house alone. Is he shipped off to another DE, or back to LV? I think Voldemort sent Wormtail to Spinner's End to spy on Snape so that is what he was doing when he was at the door. Snape probably made that comment because he didn't want to look bad to Bellatrix and Narcissa. I think when Snape goes back to Hogwarts, Voldemort probably sends him somewhere else to do another job he believes him to be competent enough to complete. Rachael From zgirnius at yahoo.com Wed Jan 4 21:25:37 2006 From: zgirnius at yahoo.com (zgirnius) Date: Wed, 04 Jan 2006 21:25:37 -0000 Subject: Merope's life and real abusers and Hermione and Fleur. In-Reply-To: <000001c60d60$ebf82ed0$f90499ac@Overton> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 145906 "Corey Overton" wrote: > 1. Hermione doesn't respect Fleur in my eyes. Want cannon to validate > this? Here it is. I believe in Ron's room Harry, Ginny, and Hermione are > all talking. Harry and Ron are talking about Fleur. don't have the tape > in front of me so I'm going on memory.Hermione says "not you as well",referring to Harry. This to me is a lack of respect of Fleur. zgirnius: First, sorry, I do not recall either whether it was Ginny or Hermione. But I think we really can't conclude from this interaction much about how Hermione values Fleur as a person or as a witch. What I think this scene is about is Ron. Hermione (quite naturally) is irked that Ron is so obviously and strongly affected by Fleur's physical attractions. This is the same Ron who claimed only to notice that Hermione was a girl when he so desperately needed a date in GoF for the Yule Ball. (I do agree with you about Merope-hence the snipping...) From briandumby at yahoo.com Wed Jan 4 21:16:26 2006 From: briandumby at yahoo.com (brian dumby) Date: Wed, 4 Jan 2006 13:16:26 -0800 (PST) Subject: Harry as a Horcrux In-Reply-To: <1136314546.1858.94000.m33@yahoogroups.com> Message-ID: <20060104211626.65975.qmail@web35913.mail.mud.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 145907 stormydog2000: > I think that after you murder someone, you then use > the spell to make a horcrux... this did not happen > with Harry, the murder failed! He (Harry) just had > powers tranferred from LV to him. Geoff: > (1) But surely the point is, if Voldemort had killed Harry, > he would not be a Horcrux, he would have been the vehicle > used to create one. > > (2) I don't subscribe to the Harry-is-a-Horcrux theory. To > save bandwidth, may I point you to message 139859 where I set > out my reasons why? Yup, I read your post 139859. I do agree that Horcrux!Harry seems very unlikely. I will add up a couple of more reasons: LV wanted to make 7 parts of his soul. So if accidentally Harry had been made into a horcrux then it means either LV knows about it or not: a) If he knows why would he try to kill Harry in GOF - destroy his own horcrux? - no I do not think so. b) If he does not know that harry has been made into horcrux he would go ahead and make the 6 horcruxes he had planned. That leaves 7 horcruxes in place along with Voldy's bodily soul part - seems an unlikely scenario given the magical number 7's importance. I rest, BD From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Wed Jan 4 21:44:03 2006 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Wed, 04 Jan 2006 21:44:03 -0000 Subject: First potions lesson/Harry getting special treatment and Draco's view of him In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 145908 > Potioncat: > There is so much happening in this first Potions class, I don't really > know where to begin, so I'll start with canon: > (That was just to counter the arguments that Harry couldn't look at his > books. He did look them over. Snape might expect him to remember > everything, I wouldn't.) Alla: Right, great quote, but that is the thing - IMO it shows that no official homework was given, since Harry does not mention ANY pages assigned to read OR any essays to write. It seems to me that he read it only because he was curious and Snape had no right to ask him anything at all, IMO. Potioncat: > We don't really know Snape's motivation in the first class. (Can't you > just hear Rickman asking, What's my motivation in this scene? No? OK, > moving right along...) Alla: LOLOL Potioncat: Is it a good way to start off teaching 11 year old > kids. Nope. Alla: Thank you! Shaun: > OK - Harry didn't have that problem. He wasn't arrogant. But I don't > think it's unreasonable for Snape to have suspected he might have > been. Harry looks a lot like his father - when Snape saw him, he must > have noticed the resemblance, it would seem to me. And from what we > know of James, he was arrogant. Alla: I think it is more than unreasonable for Snape to think that Harry may be just as arrogant as his father only because he LOOKS like his father. Snape saw Harry what for five minutes and determined that Harry is arrogant based on that? IMO it is a very bad behaviour from Snape, but see below. Shaun: > Dumbledore knew the risks Harry could become arrogant - and took > steps to try and limit the chances of that happening, but keeping him > away from the Wizarding World - so I don't think it's unreasonable > for Snape to have considered it a possibility as well. Alla: I think it is a VERY telling that in the later books the reason that Harry should stay away from WW because he may become arrogant is not mentioned ( DD says something about " not a pampered little prince" in OOP, but I think he showed their a deepest regret that Harry did not get a bit of pampering there and in HBP he sticks to blood protection and blood protection only). I believe that JKR did not intend to convey that message at all, BUT even if DD did intend to do it, he was sort of involved in Harry's life. Snape as far as we know was not and to make such conclusion based on five minutes of looking at Harry seems arrogant at best and very hateful at the most to me. IMO of course. Shaun: Yes, he's > wrong... but if he'd been right... then maybe that first class could > have been a much more positive experience for Harry, long term, than > it actually is. Alla: The point to me is he WAS wrong and we seem to agree on it, right? I don't think Snape had any right to act upon it without confirming his suspicions first. Besides, to me it is obvious that the main lasting damage which Snape did in this lesson was setting Harry up to mistrust him and dislike him AND eventually that lead to Occlumency disaster in their fifth year,IMO. Sure Harry did not practice hard enough, BUT there is no way IMO that Harry was able to ever trust Snape after what he did to him during five years and that lesson IMO was a start of all that. I think Snape did horrendous damage here, personally. > Magpie: > Getting a broom and being on the Quidditch team is special treatment > for whatever reason it happened. Alla: I said that I am conceding that this is a special treatment Magpie: So is being able to compete in the Triwizard tournament. Alla: It IS? OK, let's clarify something first, maybe we indeed talk past each other. I consider "special treatment" as something which person gets a benefit from. If you are talking about "special treatment" in the negative sense - as in attempts to kill him, attacks on his health, physical or mental, then sure Harry gets PLENTY of that special treatment, IMO. Harry has NO desire to compete In Triwizard Tournament, whole school knows it, although many don't believe it AND the most importantly even though I would LOVE Dumbledore to find a wiggle room, the canon is quite clear - it is a binding contract. Harry has no choice but to compete in something, which may result in his death and it almost, does. By that logic, do you also think that Harry getting to Graveyard is a special treatment he gets? Magpie: Or seeming to have the House Cup > Competition results changed to favor you. Alla: What special treatment? Are you talking about PS/SS and poor Slytherins being cheated of the House Cup? I am being a bit sarcastic here of course. Trio just defeated Voldemort. I see no special treatment here whatsoever. IMO of course, it was points fairly and very deservingly awarded. And this is also IMO objectively fair win, even if Slytherins do not think so. Are you talking about different House Cup competition? Magpie: So is being the > Hadmaster's favorite. Alla: Oh, Dumbledore sure showed it well by placing Harry with Dursleys. I have no doubt that Dumbledore loves Harry now, but I disagree that he got preferential treatment from him in school. In fact, the lessons that he got in HBP are IMO are very good example of how Draco's POV is objectively skewed. Draco may think that Headmaster teaches Harry because Harry is his favorite and be upset about it or something although I think that in HBP Draco was too preoccupied trying to kill Headmaster to even notice those lessons, but we as readers KNOW that those lessons have nothing to do with being Headmaster's favorite and everything to do with preparing Harry to kill Voldemort. It IS preparing Harry to survive, sure, BUT I see no proof in the books that Headmaster would not have done it for any other student who needed it. IMO of course. JMO, Alla From horridporrid03 at yahoo.com Wed Jan 4 21:46:47 2006 From: horridporrid03 at yahoo.com (horridporrid03) Date: Wed, 04 Jan 2006 21:46:47 -0000 Subject: CHAPDISC: HBP7, The Slug Club In-Reply-To: <20060103010702.10570.qmail@web36814.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 145909 > >>AnitaKH: > CHAPTER DISCUSSIONS: Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince, > Chapter 7, The Slug Club > > 1. This is the beginning of what will be a year-long obsession > with Draco for Harry. In hindsight, what does this reveal about > Harry's powers of discernment? Betsy Hp: I think Harry has good instinct, but lousy follow-through. He cottons on the fact that Draco is up to something (which is fairly obvious considering what he's seen) but he fails to see the activity going on *around* Draco. Draco drops tons of clues, as does Dumbledore, that what Draco is up to has quite a bit of depth to it. Draco is not just a happy little Death Eater in training. I think this insight coupled with his blindspot regarding Draco's humanity is what leads to Harry being petrified on the compartment floor, completely at Draco's mercy. (Of course, Hermione and Ron are even more blind than Harry, so relatively speaking, Harry's doing well. ) > 2. The Aurors in the scene are men we have never seen before. Is > this done to highlight the changes at the Ministry of Magic, or is > there some more sinister reason? Betsy Hp: Scrimgeour has his own resources, and I'm not sure he's as easy to play as Fudge was. Didn't he start asking Kingsley some rather uncomfortable questions in OotP? I have a feeling Scrimgeour has a good idea of who on his team is in Dumbledore's pocket. (Thank goodness for super-spy!Percy. ) > 3. Compare this train scene with the early train scene in OOP. > How do his feelings toward Neville and Luna compare in the two > scenes? What does this scene do for our understanding of the > Harry in HBP? > 4. In this chapter, Harry spends time with people of two very > different rungs on the social ladder: the Slug Club -v- Neville > and Luna (whose lack of popularity is touched upon several times > in this chapter: Romilda's comments, DA being a source of Luna's > only friends, Neville's own grandmother's wish for Harry as a > grandson etc.). Discuss Harry's very different opinions of the > two social circles. Betsy Hp: Harry has not made, and does not make, friends easily. He's remarkably unaware of even the names of students outside of his social circle (even those in his own House, even those in his own class). It's not that he's a snob (though to an outsider it probably comes across that way) but he doesn't trust easily. Both Luna and Neville have shown themselves trustworthy -- to a point. And they're both humble enough to not challenge Harry's view of himself. They are both still missing something, though. Because while Harry likes them, I don't think he sees them as his mates. Interestingly enough, I didn't really see the Slugclub consisting of "popular" children. Not within the school hierarchy anyway. Slughorn was looking for children with *adult* connections, or the possibility of future adult connections. So he was judging the students from a different standard than the children judged themselves. Actually, the most "popular" students at the luncheon, per Hogwarts standards, were Harry and Ginny (per Pansy and Blaise), I think. > >>(question 4 continued): > What about Draco's perception of where he is on the social ladder? > (the attempt to impress that seemingly was trigger by being > snubbed by Slughorn, his relationship with Pansy who seems > determined to form some kind of attachment to him, etc.) Betsy Hp: Oh, I'd say the attachment with Pansy is formed. A sixteen year old doesn't lounge in the lap of a girl he's not made some sort of claim on in front of his male friends. Actually, I'd say Pansy and Draco have probably been a couple for a year or two now, starting with the Yule Ball in GoF. What struck me as interesting in this scene is that Draco may not have the Malfoy connections anymore (his connections in the adult WW that Slughorn would be interested in). But his "Draco" connections are doing just fine. He's still the prince of Slytherin as it were, despite the family scandal. There had been a question as to Draco's status within Slytherin House with his father in Azkaban after OotP. But it seems his status is unaffected. So I think, rather than trying to regain status with his Death Eater assignment hints, Draco was mainly regaining his role as center of attention. > 5. Neville mentions that his wand may have been the last > Ollivander sold before he vanished. Do you think this is one of > those throwaway lines that will be significant later? How? > 6. What is the composition of Neville's wand, and will it be > important? Betsy Hp: I'd love to visit with Ollivander again, so here's hoping for some significance! And Neville's cherry wood wand with its unicorn hair core tells me that he's most likely to survive in a slasher flick, but may need to step wearily if a human sacrifice rite is brought up. > 7. Luna comes up with yet another ? er ? quirky creature. What > are the chances that Luna's wacky creatures will be proven real? > And if so, which ones? Betsy Hp: My only interest in this is if somehow Luna proves Hermione wrong about something. It'd be a funny scene and would probably do Hermione some good. > 8. As we learn about each student's connections during Slughorn's > luncheon party, whose story, if any, do you suppose will prove to > be important in book 7? Betsy Hp: Belby maybe. I was a bit surprised his uncle invented the Wolfsbane potion. I've been totally corrupted by fanfic, I know, but really, with Snape and now Lily do we really *need* another potions genius? (Idle speculation: maybe Lily invented it and Uncle Damocles stole it?) > 10. We see that Pansy and Draco seem to be a couple, based on this > scene. Will this have any significance in the future? (oh, like, > say, Pansy's is Draco's hideout or something ) Betsy Hp: I doubt it. I'll be surprised if Pansy is fleshed out any further, especially since JKR is not a romance writer. At all. I think the significance of their relationship is the fact that Draco is unselfish enough, human enough, to have a steady girlfriend. Apparently, he's got more emotional maturity than Ron -- per Hermione, anyway . Personally, after reading about the hell Draco goes through in HBP, I'm glad he's got Pansy there to give him a bit of comfort now and again. > 11. I find the end of this chapter difficult to read, wishing at > an emotional level that Harry would use more caution. Harry's > impulsiveness has gotten him into scrapes before, and he once > again takes a chance and loses. How do you think this tendency > will play out? (Curiosity killed the cat or caution makes cowards > of us all?) Betsy Hp: I never really worried that Harry was in a huge amount of danger from Draco. I did think Harry was foolish to underestimate Draco, but I was so thrilled to see Draco prove Harry a fool that I wasn't really bemoaning Harry's mistake. What is interesting, to me anyway, is that we later learn that the person in the most danger in this scene is Draco. From what Dumbledore said on the Tower, any untoward attention paid to Draco would end in his and his family's death. An immediate detention for assulting "the Chosen One" would have probably been labled as such. Good questions! Betsy Hp From horridporrid03 at yahoo.com Wed Jan 4 22:15:45 2006 From: horridporrid03 at yahoo.com (horridporrid03) Date: Wed, 04 Jan 2006 22:15:45 -0000 Subject: First potions lesson/Harry getting special treatment and Draco's view of him In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 145910 > >>Alla: > Right, great quote, but that is the thing - IMO it shows that no > official homework was given, since Harry does not mention ANY > pages assigned to read OR any essays to write. It seems to me that > he read it only because he was curious and Snape had no right to > ask him anything at all, IMO. Betsy Hp: Um... Snape is a potions teacher asking potions questions in a potions class. But you're suggesting Snape doesn't have a right to ask *any* questions? Seems a bit extreme, IMO. > >>Potioncat: > > Is it a good way to start off teaching 11 year old kids. Nope. Betsy Hp: Unless you're a demanding teacher expecting high results. And, as canon shows, Snape is both. And he succeeds in his mission. I'm betting Snape starts out all of his first year classes with that particular speech and some "impossible to answer" questions. Though I'd also bet he spreads the questions around, usually. But his questions do let his students know that success in Snape's classroom will come from hard work. > >>Alla: > > Are you talking about PS/SS and poor Slytherins being cheated of > the House Cup? I am being a bit sarcastic here of course. Trio > just defeated Voldemort. I see no special treatment here > whatsoever. IMO of course, it was points fairly and very > deservingly awarded. And this is also IMO objectively fair win, > even if Slytherins do not think so. > Betsy Hp: For me, it's a timing issue. The trio had defeated Voldemort (well, not really, but we'll go with the propaganda ) at least three days ago. But Dumbledore, rather cruelly IMO, waits to assign house points until the closing feast. It's rather like a groom waiting to for the bride to make her way down the aisle to tell her he's in love with her maid of honor. It's good for the bride to know before she says "I do", but to quote "The Wedding Singer": "Again, something you could have told me *YESTERDAY*!!" Dumbledore didn't just reward Gryffindor, he punished Slytherin. It was an odd choice, and it never sat well with me. (Personally, I think he's trying to make up for the Norbert incident, and it does win Harry back into Gryffindor's good graces, but at what cost?) > >>Alla: > > I have no doubt that Dumbledore loves Harry now, but I disagree > that he got preferential treatment from him in school. > Betsy Hp: Yes, because Dumbledore routinely hands out invisibility cloaks to students, and makes sure to quietly return them when the student looses them while breaking school rules. Doesn't every headmaster? I do think Dumbledore had a purpose behind the special treatment he gave Harry. As Magpie pointed out, Harry is the boy of prophecy; he is the Chosen One. But that does lead to "special treatment", and whether it's deserved or not, it's rather a lot to ask others to not notice and resent. Draco got special treatment in HBP, and plenty of readers resent it. Even though Draco's life was at stake. Betsy Hp From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Wed Jan 4 22:26:30 2006 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Wed, 04 Jan 2006 22:26:30 -0000 Subject: First potions lesson/Harry getting special treatment In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 145911 > Betsy Hp: > Um... Snape is a potions teacher asking potions questions in a > potions class. But you're suggesting Snape doesn't have a right to > ask *any* questions? Seems a bit extreme, IMO. Alla: I am suggesting that Snape should not ask any questions till he actually assigned any books to read. Does not seem that extreme to me at all. IMO of course > > >>Potioncat: > > > > Is it a good way to start off teaching 11 year old kids. Nope. > > Betsy Hp: > Unless you're a demanding teacher expecting high results. And, as > canon shows, Snape is both. And he succeeds in his mission. I'm > betting Snape starts out all of his first year classes with that > particular speech and some "impossible to answer" questions. Alla: Snape succeeds in his mission to make Harry mistrust him, that is true and if we were shown ANY proof that this is his usual first years speech and questions, my reaction to that would have been different. For now, as I said I picture Snape barking at Harry as vicious dog for the only reason of Harry looking like James. Could I be wrong? Sure, maybe Snape had other reasons, but with every book it seems to me that maybe it is all indeed about Snape grudge as motivating reason for his actions. "You and your filthy father" indeed. IMO of course. > Betsy Hp: > For me, it's a timing issue. The trio had defeated Voldemort (well, > not really, but we'll go with the propaganda ) at least three > days ago. Alla: Not really? OK, they defeated Quirrell who had Voldemort in the back on his head and that made Voldemort dissappear again Betsy: > Dumbledore didn't just reward Gryffindor, he punished Slytherin. It > was an odd choice, and it never sat well with me. (Personally, I > think he's trying to make up for the Norbert incident, and it does > win Harry back into Gryffindor's good graces, but at what cost?) Alla: Again, he awarded well deserved points. It may not have sit well with Slytherin pride, but the point was made Gryffindor gets special tretment here. To me special means undeserved, unless you argue that Trio did not deserve those points, I don't see any special treatment here. As to why awarding during the Feast. well, why not? They behaved like Heroes and IMO School should honor their heroes. > > >>Alla: > > > > I have no doubt that Dumbledore loves Harry now, but I disagree > > that he got preferential treatment from him in school. > > > > Betsy Hp: > Yes, because Dumbledore routinely hands out invisibility cloaks to > students, and makes sure to quietly return them when the student > looses them while breaking school rules. Doesn't every headmaster? > Alla: Harry's father left the cloak with Dumbledore. I think that Dumbledore would give back the possession which was left in his care to any student. IMO of course. JMO, Alla From fhsulisa at yahoo.com Wed Jan 4 22:44:06 2006 From: fhsulisa at yahoo.com (parcelmouthks) Date: Wed, 04 Jan 2006 22:44:06 -0000 Subject: CHAPDISC: HBP7, The Slug Club In-Reply-To: <20060103010702.10570.qmail@web36814.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 145912 AnitaKH: > 3. Compare this train scene with the early train scene in OOP. How do his feelings toward Neville and Luna compare in the two scenes? What does this scene do for our understanding of the Harry in HBP? parcelmouthks: JKR speaks to this directly in her interview with MuggleNet and The-Leaky-Cauldron. She says it's an indicator of how much Harry's grown up: "One of the ways in which I tried to show that Harry has done a lot of growing up ? in "Phoenix," remember when Cho comes into the compartment, and he thinks, `I wish I could have been discovered sitting with better people,' basically? He's with Luna and Neville. So literally the identical thing happens in "Prince," and he's with Luna and Neville again, but this time, he has grown up, and as far as he's concerned he is with two of the coolest people on the train. They may not look that cool. Harry has really grown." From a_svirn at yahoo.com Wed Jan 4 22:47:29 2006 From: a_svirn at yahoo.com (a_svirn) Date: Wed, 04 Jan 2006 22:47:29 -0000 Subject: Symbols & Name Meanings In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 145913 > MercuryBlue: > It's not. The ring is engraved with the coat of arms of the Peverells, > an old, rich, and apparently extinct pureblood family, which may or > may not be descended from Slytherin himself. The Slytherin artifact is > Merope's locket. I'll let the experts speculate on the symbolism of > that, though I suspect that the locket was a birthday gift from > Salazar to his wife, or some such thing. > a_svirn Well, I don't know about "pureblood" but as for old and rich that's for certain. The Peverels alternatively spelled as Peverells and Peverils were descendants of William the Conqueror and hereditary Sheriffs of Nottingham (I guess, one of them must have been the chap who hounded Robin Hood). Also one of Peverells married a Lancaster. And, of course, John of Gaunt was the duke of Lancaster, so there's a link, however fictional. From iam.kemper at gmail.com Wed Jan 4 22:53:15 2006 From: iam.kemper at gmail.com (Kemper) Date: Wed, 4 Jan 2006 14:53:15 -0800 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Drinking the potion, sparing Lily and fearing DD was: Interrview quote re: Lily & Voldemort Message-ID: <700201d40601041453k42ba679ar6cc959a75158b32d@mail.gmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 145914 On 1/3/06, Jen Reese wrote: > > ...snip...The potion in the cave was designed to kill > someone but only after Voldemort learned why the person was drinking > the potion & looking for the horcrux. I think Godric's Hollow could > follow this type of thinking; I'm growing to like the idea he needed > information from Lily. > > Although I still think it's possible there was a bit of concern or > fear on his part related to killing Lily. There is canon Voldemort > is capable of feeling this --how many times has Harry heard that > Voldemort fears Dumbledore? And we don't know why. It could be > related to Dumbledore's work on immortality, his power, how he > defeated Grindelwald or a combination of the above. If Lily was also > working on something related to immortality, or Voldemort assumed > she was, perhaps he also had a twinge of fear about her? Just a > thought. . . Kemper now: A few thoughts... I don't think the potion was designed for a future interrogation session with Voldemort. After drinking the potion, DD wanted water. The water available to anyone after drinking the potion seems to be from the Dark Lake, which comes alive with the Dead (don't have the spelling for Feraiandinfianti) once the water is breached. The Dead were interested in dragging Harry back into the water where he could possibly drown. . That to me shows Voldemorts lack of desire for information about a possible Horcruxnapper. As far as Lily having information, I don't think so because Voldemort could have used baby Harry's life or torture as a bargaining chip (a false chip, but still...) in order to get said information. . On a side note... Does anyone else think DD reacted rashly with regards to the potion? Why didn't DD save a vial of the potion to take back to Hogwarts and have one of his two Potion Masters develop an antidote? I wonder if RAB took a vial to his old Potions Professor. I wonder if that professor went into hiding for the first time after learning of RAB's death shortly after helping RAB with an antidote. . Anyway... My understanding of Voldemort's fear of Dumbledore stems from his first meeting with Dumbledore in which he showed his evil and his weakness. Voldemort doesn't have that advantage with DD. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From c.john at imperial.ac.uk Wed Jan 4 22:55:47 2006 From: c.john at imperial.ac.uk (esmith222002) Date: Wed, 04 Jan 2006 22:55:47 -0000 Subject: TBAY: Re: DD and Godric's Hollow (Long) Draught of Living Death, DD&Snape in HBP In-Reply-To: <1f0.4a2a563a.30ec98d1@aol.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 145915 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, fuzzlebub85 at a... wrote: > > Kaylee Tonks-Lupin here answering her Captain's call! > > > Kaylee Tonks-Lupin is strolling along the beach of Theory Bay, when she sees > Brothergib standing on the shore. He looks rather lost. She walks up to > Brothergib and politely asks, "May I help you?" He nods. > I feel like I'm intruding!! And despite a thorough search, I cannot find the suitable ingredients to make a margarita - so I am (unfortunately) completely sober! However, if your theory is correct, DD was desperately trying to find Sirius, so he could apply this ointment. Therefore, at the time of Voldemort's defeat he didn't know Harry was at Godric's Hollow. So who told DD that Harry had defeated Voldemort? You seem to suggest that Snape was at Hogwarts ready to apply the ointment. Someone must have told DD? Brothergib thanks Kaylee, waves to the others on the boat and continues on up the beach, scratching his head. > > Brothergib: > > > > So where did DD disappear to from the time when Voldemort was > > defeated, to the moment he finally arrived at Privet Drive? > > Kaylee smiles. "Why, I believe I hear my Captain calling!" Indeed, Susan's > voice can be clearly heard: > > > SSSusan: > Ahem. Jen, Potioncat, Kaylee, other crewmates on the DRIBBLE > SHADOWS -- 'tis tooting our own horn time! ;-) > > Kaylee grins. "Come on, Brothergib! I'll show you the best idea I've seen > yet!" She grabs Brothergib's hand and pulls him toward the DRIBBLE SHADOWS. When > they reach the deck, she lets Captain SSSusan explain further: > > SSSusan: > IOW, time to > resurrect our theory of what happened in the "missing 24 hours." > > Some of us believe that DD may have used that time to "shore up" the > protections on Harry, not believing Voldy to be fully gone for all > time. It's my contention that DD, Hagrid & Snape worked together to > apply a protective potion/ointment containing dragon blood onto baby > Harry during those 24 hours. > > If you're interested, here's where it starts, and there are several > follow-ups & responses: > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/128717 > > > Brothergib: > > Sirius (who is not at Hogwarts) also receives this information and > > rushes off to Godric's Hollow. > > SSSusan: > I think that Sirius realized something was wrong because he was > supposed to have met up with PP, who did not show. In my version of > things, Sirius dashed off to GH to see if everything was alright and > just *happened* upon the awful scene, as opposed to having been > officially informed about it by DD or someone else. > > Kaylee nods. "It makes a lot of sense," she says breathlessly, giving her > Captain an almost worshipful look. "Rule number one: The captain is always > right! Oh wait, that's Captain Amber's rule...well, it can be Captain Susan's > too," she decides. "Anyway, Brothergib, Dragon's Resistance In Blood Bestows > Life-saving Effects: Snape, > Hagrid And Dumbledore's Ointment Was Supplement is what it stands for. I > know some people probably don't believe Snape would make the ointment > after...after HBP," she admits, lowering her eyes for a moment of silence. "But I > believe there's still the issue of why Snape was trusted by Dumbledore. That all > fits in here. And..." Kaylee lowered her voice. "Here. I'll need the relevant > canon in HBP...bad me, I know, not having the book on hand..." Kaylee > blushed. "Brothergib, Captain Sue, perhaps Jen, Potioncat...someone?" she begs. "I > know that Draughts of the Living Death ought to be important. I'm sure Snape > brewed one for Dumbledore. He had to have." She has a wild, almost hysterical > look in her eyes. "Snape can't be evil! He just can't! Dumbledore isn't > dead!" > She throws herself into the sand and beats her fists on her beach towel, > howling in pain, anger, and denial. Kaylee knew she'd gotten way off topic, but > it had to be said. > > ~Kaylee Tonks-Lupin, apologizing profusely to the Elves > > > Siriusly Snapey Susan, cap'n of the not especially sea-worthy but > still floatin', I think, DRIBBLE SHADOWS > > > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] > From katmac at katmac.cncdsl.com Wed Jan 4 23:03:17 2006 From: katmac at katmac.cncdsl.com (lagattalucianese) Date: Wed, 04 Jan 2006 23:03:17 -0000 Subject: Voldemort vs. Tom In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 145916 > > ... True, the orphanage was not the best of > environments, but the rest of the kids managed to have their values > straight. What on earth should DD have done? Explain to him the > difference between good and evil? Don't you think he already knew > that even before he came to Hogwarts? > > > Gerry > La Gatta Lucianese: As I mentioned in a post somewhile back, it is coming to be a more or less accepted theory that psychopathic personalities are born, not made. Nurture may determine the way psychopathy expresses itself (does the child turn into a serial killer or the corporate boss from hell?), but the personality itself seems to be inborn, and can appear fully formed in very young children. See Dr. Robert Hare on the subject. I think both the orphanage and Hogwarts could have been as nurturing as all getout, and Tom Riddle would still have turned out the way he did. He was already a proper little creep when Dumbledore first encountered him. From katmac at katmac.cncdsl.com Wed Jan 4 23:13:57 2006 From: katmac at katmac.cncdsl.com (lagattalucianese) Date: Wed, 04 Jan 2006 23:13:57 -0000 Subject: Snape's Dementor Essay In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 145917 > ... > > Scam : > > Yes, it did strike me in my first reading itself that Snape knew of > other methods to tackle dementors .... what could it be? > La Gatta Lucianese: There is probably more than one way to get rid of dementors. It may depend on the professor. I'd be inclined to try Vanish myself, though I imagine Mrs. Scower works too. > ... > > Also, how DO those terrible things breed? Does it mean that there are > male and female dementors? and their offsprings are also dead and > rotting????? Yuck ..... the very thought gives me goosebumps .... > > Scam (vigourously shaking her head in a failing effort to throw out > these sick thoughts from her mind) > La Gatta Lucianese (working up the spirit for spring house cleaning): Spoors. You know, like mildew, or the stuff that grows in the back of the fridge and inside toilet tanks. Aunt Petunia would be dynamite on them. From drednort at alphalink.com.au Thu Jan 5 00:09:49 2006 From: drednort at alphalink.com.au (Shaun Hately) Date: Thu, 05 Jan 2006 11:09:49 +1100 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: First potions lesson/Harry getting special treatment and Draco's view of him In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <43BCFE7D.3921.4D6C5F@localhost> No: HPFGUIDX 145918 On 4 Jan 2006 at 21:44, dumbledore11214 wrote: > Shaun: > > OK - Harry didn't have that problem. He wasn't arrogant. But I > don't > > think it's unreasonable for Snape to have suspected he might have > > been. Harry looks a lot like his father - when Snape saw him, he > must > > have noticed the resemblance, it would seem to me. And from what we > > know of James, he was arrogant. > > Alla: > > I think it is more than unreasonable for Snape to think that Harry may > be just as arrogant as his father only because he LOOKS like his > father. Snape saw Harry what for five minutes and determined that > Harry is arrogant based on that? IMO it is a very bad behaviour from > Snape, but see below. Shaun: Sorry - you've misunderstood me. Entirely my fault, looking at what I wrote I was not clear. I don't think Snape decided that Harry might be arrogant based on his looks alone. I think that Snape had the same concerns about Harry that Dumbledore did - Dumbledore was very obviously concerned that Harry might grow up arrogant and that is part of the reason he placed him with the Dursleys - only part of the reason, but Dumbledore was aware right from the start that this was a risk. "'A letter?' repeated Professor McGonagall faintly, sitting back down on the wall. 'Really, Dumbledore, you think you can explain all this in a letter? These people will never understand him! He'll be famous - a legend - I wouldn't be surprised if today was known as Harry Potter day in the future - there will be books written about Harry - every child in our world will know his name!' 'Exactly,' said Dumbledore, looking very seriously over the top of his half-moon glasses. 'It would be enough to turn any boy's head. Famous before he can walk and talk! Famous for something he won't even remember! Can't you see how much better off he'll be, growing up away from all that until he's ready to take it?'" (PS, p15-16) If Dumbledore was aware of this as a risk, then it's perfectly reasonable for Snape to be aware of it as well. It's not a difficult concept at all - and it's especially not a difficult concept for someone raised in the Wizarding World who has seen, first hand, the sense of absolute entitlement that some Pureblood wizards feel. And Snape does decide, rightly or wrongly, that Harry is arrogant. "'So,' he said, straightening up again. 'Everyone from the Minister of Magic downward has been trying to keep famous Harry Potter safe from Sirius Black. But famous Harry Potter is a law unto himself Let the ordinary people worry about his safety! Famous Harry Potter goes where he wants to, with no thought for the consequences. Harry stayed silent. Snape was trying to provoke him into telling the truth. He wasn't going to do it. Snape had no proof - yet. 'How extraordinarily like your father you are, Potter,' Snape said suddenly, his eyes glinting. 'He too was exceedingly arrogant. A small amount of talent on the Quidditch field made him think he was a cut above the rest of us too. Strutting around the place with his friends and admirers... The resemblance between you is uncanny.'" (PoA, p209) I suppose my point is that I think Snape has every reason to believe Harry might have been arrogant at the start of Philosopher's Stone - Dumbledore knew the risk, the risk was real. How much Snape knew about the steps Dumbledore had taken to try and ensure this didn't happen is unknown in my view. I don't think it's an unreasonable assumption, though. So as Snape encountered Harry, he was looking for signs that he was arrogant - as his father had been. And what he sees is a boy very like his father. And we know his father to have been arrogant - in Snape's judgement certainly. Is Snape right to assume that Harry is as arrogant as his father, just because he seems like him. No. *But* Snape was bullied by James - to me that seems absolutely obvious. As someone who experience significant bullying at school, myself, I can say that I hope I never wind up teaching the son of one of the boys who bullied me badly, especially if he looked like his father. Because while I would, I hope, do my best to treat him fairly and separately from his father, I'm honestly not sure that I could be certain I wouldn't find it very hard not to see the father in the son. Snape is wrong. But I can understand why he may have felt that he was right. And it's also possible - possible as speculation, there's no way proof for this - that Snape has heard at least one report that may have lead him to believe that Harry is arrogant. A report from Draco Malfoy. Consider Malfoy's contact with Harry up until this first lesson. Malfoy has, basically, met Harry twice that we know of (some further contact in some classes prior to potions seems likely, I think as well, but we have no details on that). Initially meets Draco in Madam Malkins, where, except for one moment when he defends Hagrid, he more or less goes along with Draco's pureblook ideology. Now, I am not, in any way, blaming Harry for that - at the time he doesn't have the knowledge he needs to reasonaly respond to Malfoy. But given his lack of response, I think Draco quite reasonably could have assumed that Harry shares his views. Especially as Harry confirms that his parents were a witch and wizard. Draco's next contact with Harry is on the train, where he finds Harry sitting with Ron Weasley - a pureblood, albeit not a very high class one in Draco's view. But a pureblood nonetheless. And Draco acknowledges Ron's blood status but seeks to claim a heirarchy: "'You'll soon find out some wizarding families are much better than others, Potter. Yo don't want to go making friends with the wrong sort. I can help you there.' He held out his hand to shake Harry's, but Harry didn't take it. 'I think I can tell who the wrong sort are for myself, thanks,' he said coolly." (PS, p81). Just for a moment consider what has happened through Draco's eyes. He's met Harry at Madam Malkins and he's been reasonably friendly to him, and talked to him, more or less as an equal - even though to begin with he doesn't even know if Harry is pureblood or not (although he does assume he is). Harry has not objected to his pureblood statements - except, as I say, for briefly defending Hagrid. Then, on the train, Draco seeks out Harry and discovers him in a compartment with a pureblood wizard - a Weasley, but a pureblood none the less. And Draco offers him friendship. And Harry rejects it in a way that really does seem to indicate that he sees himself as superior to Draco. And, I would say that he does - but we can assume that his sense of superiority comes from his assessment of Draco's character. To Draco, it may seem quite different though - that Potter has decided he is somehow superior to the Malfoys - and in Draco's world, virtually nobody is superior to the Malfoys. Honestly, given what Draco sees, and coloured by his experiences, I think that to him, Harry does across as exceedingly arrogant in that encounter on the train. As feeling superior to all wizards. If Draco passed on this information to Snape, deliberately or otherwise. it's yet another reason why Snape might have felt that Harry was likely arrogant. The fact Harry looks like his father is just one little issue - among others - that for me, do build up to a reasonable assumption by Snape that Harry might be arrogant. The fact he resembles his father is logically minor - but psychologically may be quite important in Snape's assessment. > Shaun: > > Dumbledore knew the risks Harry could become arrogant - and took > > steps to try and limit the chances of that happening, but keeping > him > > away from the Wizarding World - so I don't think it's unreasonable > > for Snape to have considered it a possibility as well. > > Alla: > > I think it is a VERY telling that in the later books the reason that > Harry should stay away from WW because he may become arrogant is not > mentioned ( DD says something about " not a pampered little prince" in > OOP, but I think he showed their a deepest regret that Harry did not > get a bit of pampering there and in HBP he sticks to blood protection > and blood protection only). I believe that JKR did not intend to > convey that message at all, BUT even if DD did intend to do it, he was > sort of involved in Harry's life. Snape as far as we know was not and > to make such conclusion based on five minutes of looking at Harry > seems arrogant at best and very hateful at the most to me. IMO of > course. Shaun: As I have said above, I don't really assume that Snape just based this assessment on five minutes of looking at Harry. I think he started with a reasonable assumption that the 'Boy Who Lived' might well have wound up arrogant and he's moving to address that (the teachers who did this to me didn't know if I was arrogant or not - they had never met me - but in my case, their assumption had some validity), and I think he may also have possibly had more information than many people suppose, if he'd heard anything from Draco (either directly, or indirectly - perhaps overhearing Draco talking to someone else - remember Harry is a celebrity, and Draco does seem to have had more contact with him than anyone else in Slytherin and I think Draco is the type to boast about his contact to anyone interested). As for the idea that Dumbledore's desire for Harry not to grow up spoilt not being mentioned in the later books - honestly I can't see any reason to suppose it would be. There's no real scope for discussing it until the end of Order of the Phoenix where Dumbledore explains things. We don't see conferences on how Harry Potter is being raised, or anything. The only Wizarding family Harry spend any time with, really, is the Weasley's - and Mr and Mrs Weasley seem to me, for the most part, to go out of their way not to treat Harry as anything particularly special. Or... more accurately, I think they treat him in the most special way they really could - almost as one of their family. But while that is very special indeed, it's not a way to turn his head. The discussion of why Dumbledore did what he did really only comes up at the end of Order of the Phoenix. Until that time, he hasn't explained everything to Harry - so the fact this desire that Harry not grow up arrogant hasn't been mentioned since early in Philosopher's Stone, doesn't strike me as at all surprising or telling. And he only addresses it in passing at the end of Order of the Phoenix, as this issue is much less important than the fact of keeping Harry alive. But he is glad that Harry isn't a 'pampered little prince' - I certainly agree that he thinks Harry should have been treated better than he was. But that's not incompatible. He didn't want Harry raised to believe he was some sort of Messiah. But he didn't want him raised to believe he was worthless either. What he hoped for (and I think he may have known even from the start that this wasn't likely) was for Harry to be raised as an ordinary boy. Not pampered, not spoiled... but there's nothing wrong with love. > Shaun: > Yes, he's > > wrong... but if he'd been right... then maybe that first class > could > > have been a much more positive experience for Harry, long term, > than > > it actually is. > > > Alla: > > The point to me is he WAS wrong and we seem to agree on it, right? I > don't think Snape had any right to act upon it without confirming his > suspicions first. Shaun: Yes, he was wrong - and I agree that Snape acted inappropriately, because he was wrong about Harry. And I do think he should have taken more time and more care to work out what Harry was really like. *But* it's easy to say that, and much harder to do it. A person will only take such care *if* they believe they are likely to be wrong. If Snape had somehow come to the conclusion that he was right (erroneous though that conclusion would have been), he wouldn't have seen a need for further investigation. He'd have been wrong in that - but people do make mistakes sometimes, we cannot expect perfection. My point is simply that there may be circumstances in which Snape's behaviour in that first potions class makes a lot more sense than in other circumstances. If he really believed Harry was likely to be highly arrogant and believe he was superior to others (and I can understand such an erroneous belief) that is quite different from if he was just being nasty without any reason at all. Alla: > Besides, to me it is obvious that the main lasting damage which Snape > did in this lesson was setting Harry up to mistrust him and dislike > him AND eventually that lead to Occlumency disaster in their fifth > year,IMO. > > Sure Harry did not practice hard enough, BUT there is no way IMO that > Harry was able to ever trust Snape after what he did to him during > five years and that lesson IMO was a start of all that. > > I think Snape did horrendous damage here, personally. Shaun: I'm afraid I disagree with this, quite strongly - and here I am writing as someone who, at the age of 12 was very severely emotionally damaged by teachers (after having suffered more minor damage in the years before that). And that left me in a situation where I had a very good reason not to trust teachers. And for a long while, I did not. But the primary reason I didn't, is that I chose not to. It was my choice not to trust teachers anymore after my year of hell. Eventually, though, I became convinced that the only way to move beyond that was to give them another chance - and decide to trust them again. And when that happened, I discovered that most were trustworthy. My point is that while I would certainly agree that it's hard for Harry to trust Snape during those occlumency lessons, maybe even too hard, I don't think Harry even tried. I don't think he made the effort. Now, I don't blame him for that - he's only fifteen and at fifteen it's pretty hard to expect a kid to do that. But the fact remains that he didn't try. He could have tried. Tried and failed - very possibly. But you can't succeed if you don't try - and Harry had the power to make more of an effort than he did. Did Snape damage the chances that Harry could trust him? Yes, he absolutely, positively did. Just as teachers I had damaged my ability to trust them. It happens. But, basically, you have to decide to move beyond that. You can let the people who damaged your ability to trust do it for all time, or you can decide to put that behind you. Harry's refusal to try and trust Snape during the Occlumency lessons didn't hurt Snape - it only hurt Harry. It was utterly counterproductive. The fact is, Snape is a perfect example of someone who has let childhood bitterness - no matter how justified it might have been at the time - cloud his life forever. If Harry makes the same mistake... well, the only person that hurts is Harry. No, maybe he wouldn't have been able to overcome this - it's asking a lot of a fifteen year old child (and, no, I didn't manage it that young myself - I was into my twenties before I was able to come close to reconciling my feelings of rage and anger about the teachers who'd hurt me - it took me years even after I started trying), but he doesn't even try in my view. At least not at first. I do think we start to see some changes during the Occlumency lessons, but unfortunately Harry's invasion of Snape's privacy wrecked that (and after that I see the same problem in reverse - Snape should have been able to accept that Harry did something very stupid and wrong (and I think Harry did - he was utterly in the wrong on that occasion) and moved beyond that. And Snape is an adult - and, furthermore, Snape is a teacher. He should have been able to do that. At the very least, he should have informed Dumbledore that an insurmountable issue had arisen. What Snape did to Harry in that first lesson was wrong. A lot of what Snape has done to Harry over the years is wrong. I don't doubt that at all. My question though is what is his motivation for what he does? I think that is a very open question. Snape, it seems to me, misjudges Harry. While we can condemn that misjudgement, perhaps, in itself, I think that we should try and consider it in trying to work out why Snape does what he does. His beliefs about Harry, true or false, justified or unjustified, can place his behaviour in a different light. I suppose the question is, in my view, is did Snape make one big misjudgement about Harry's personality and character to begin with, and all his treatment of Harry stems from that initial mistake? Or has Snape instead made dozens and dozens of smaller misjudgements over the years? Or is he just mean and horrible? I don't think he's just mean and horrible. I don't think things are that simple. I think, as I have said before, that Snape's teaching methods are generally speaking not invalid (though at the same time, not necessarily best practice). Harry does seem to me a special case. So... I think the more likely scenarios are the first two - either one big misjudgement that has coloured everything since, or many, many smaller misjudgements. If there was a big initial mistake, it seems to me that it happened either prior to that potion lesson or just as it started. And if it does exist, I would say it most likely comes from Snape having judged Harry to be arrogant. And, while I don't think it was true at the time, frankly, I think that Harry has behaved in a manner that served to reinforce that over the years. The fact is, Harry does ignore rules if they don't suit him - sometimes for good reason. Sometimes not (slipping into Hogsmeade in Prisoner of Azkaban - even Lupin takes him to task for that one). He does have a very high opinion of himself in some ways - frankly as time goes on, I think Harry does become a little arrogant. Considering what he's achieved, this isn't surprising - *but* it's certainly there for someone who is looking for signs of arrogance to see. Basically, I think that back at the start, Snape may have made a single error of judgement (and a not totally unreasonable one) - and that has coloured things ever since. While that is not a good situation, and is not particularly to his credit, it's a different situation from one in which he is just nasty, or cruel, or mean. People have talked, in recent days, about how some of us see the Bouncing Ferret incident differently because of the way we see Draco. Well, it seems to me that Snape sees Harry quite differently from the rest of us. And, of course, that affects his views. Yours Without Wax, Dreadnought Shaun Hately | www.alphalink.com.au/~drednort/thelab.html (ISTJ) | drednort at alphalink.com.au | ICQ: 6898200 "You know the very powerful and the very stupid have one thing in common. They don't alter their views to fit the facts. They alter the facts to fit the views. Which can be uncomfortable if you happen to be one of the facts that need altering." The Doctor - Doctor Who: The Face of Evil Where am I: Frankston, Victoria, Australia From richter at ridgenet.net Thu Jan 5 00:50:43 2006 From: richter at ridgenet.net (richter_kuymal) Date: Thu, 05 Jan 2006 00:50:43 -0000 Subject: CHAPDISC: HBP7, Harry & Draco (was The Slug Club) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 145919 > Meri now: > > > 1. This is the beginning of what will be a year-long obsession > with Draco for Harry. In hindsight, what does this reveal about > Harry's powers of discernment? > > Meri - Is it just me or did anyone else get the feeling (at this > point, anyway) that JKR was just retreading all the Harry/Draco > stuff of the past only to, at the end of the book, at long last > prove Harry right and reveal Draco as a conspirator and bad guy? > Harry's been trying to bust Draco for *something* ever since first > year ==== I don't think that's really as true as one might believe. In SS/PS, I never read anything that indicated Harry thought DRACO was involved in trying to get the stone -- it was SNAPE who was the suspect. Draco is really only shown as being an antagonist and is guilty of the things he's accused of (spying on Hagrid, stealing Neville's remembrall, etc). In COS, it isn't HARRY who accuses Draco, it's RON: "who do we know who thinks Muggle-borns are scum?" He looked at Hermione, Hermione looked back, unconvinced. "if you are talking about Malfoy_--" "Of Course I am!" said RON.... (page 158 in my scholastic ppk version). And who IS at least partly guilty? It is Malfoy's father. In POA, Harry never accuses Malfoy of doing something he hasn't - Malfoy DOES make an issue of Buckbeak. He DOES bring up Sirius, harrass Ron (with Goyle & Crabbe at his side) -- I don't notice Harry indicating that Malfoy is guilty of anything he didn't actually DO. In OOP, Malfoy is part of the IS and IS acting the role of "bad guy bully" but Harry certainly doesn't seem to accuse him of being the snitch on the DA, setting up Sirius or being a DE. That he thinks Malfoy is "the type" is pretty understandable -- Malfoy has been ACTING like he wants to be a DE. And in HBP, of course, Malfoy actually does at least contribute to DD's death. I don't see Harry falsely accusing Malfoy of anything OR of going out of his way to find Malfoy guilty. The PP episode does as much to CLEAR Malfoy as it would have been useful if Malfoy had actually had information. When you have a reasonable clue, it's not unreasonable if you follow up on it. Malfoy was talking like he had some inside information. That Harry is right about Malfoy indicates to me that he is ALSO right about Snape (but then I do believe in ESE!Snape, who isn't on anyone's side but Snape's). His accusations on Malfoy in HBP certainly don't seem to be unrealistic OR unreasonable. PAR From miles at martinbraeutigam.de Thu Jan 5 02:17:38 2006 From: miles at martinbraeutigam.de (Miles) Date: Thu, 5 Jan 2006 03:17:38 +0100 Subject: Moralising and preaching/Loose ends in Book 7 References: Message-ID: <01fc01c6119e$342c20d0$14b2a8c0@rechnerchen> No: HPFGUIDX 145920 > Miles: > the main threads should have an end that at least relates > to the other ends. If they are not, I doubt a series like Harry Potter could > be good literature. This is not a short story Geoff Bannister wrote: > Permit me to disagree with you in turn. > If I read a story in which all the loose ends are tied up, it always > seems to me as being too neat and too "clever". > > But it is not her style to tidy everything up neatly. The world of > Harry Potter parallels our real world and interacts with it and, in > so doing, I believe it leaves unfinished and unknowable bits and > pieces strewn along the way. There are a myriad of odd facts which we > do not know, probably not germane to the main story. Miles: I think we do *not* disagree. Yes, there will be many loose ends after book 7. There will be important issues of the Potterverse without a proper end - for example I do not expect a solution for the corruption in the wizarding society (maybe the beginning of a solution). This will be a loose end - but not an important one for the story of Harry Potter. Important for the Potterverse - yes. But Potterverse will cease to exist with the final chapter of the final book, as far as it concerns JKR. We will know the secret of Voldemort, we will know how love could vanquish him, we will know about the protection Lily's sacrifice installed. We will see Harry as a man, so this is the end of the Bildungsroman. We will see the final duel of Good and Evil (not for the world, but for the story). We will know the answers to the *important* questions, and lose ends hanging in the decoration. That's what a novel should do (it's not a short story after all). Speaking of the meta level of the story, Good and Evil in general, love and hate, moral/ethics, racism - I do not expect solutions, merely answers to these loose ends. But this is something completely different. Miles From belviso at attglobal.net Thu Jan 5 02:16:17 2006 From: belviso at attglobal.net (Magpie) Date: Wed, 4 Jan 2006 21:16:17 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: First potions lesson/Harry getting special treatment and Draco's view of him References: Message-ID: <01ad01c6119e$037cbfd0$fb66400c@Spot> No: HPFGUIDX 145921 Irene: What do you mean "there was no way he could"? Right next to him sits a muggleborn student that demonstrated that there is a way. PJ: Yes, but Hermione's parents were very open about her going to Hogwarts, got her the books early and left her alone to read them. Harry, on the other hand, because of the interference from the Dursleys, only found out about his magical background and got his letter from Hogwarts the night before he got his books and left for Hogwarts. Maybe if he'd had the time Hermione did he'd have looked through his books too. Magpie: I think the main point here that's getting lost here is that regardless of whether Harry could have done this, the point was that he wouldn't. I really don't think Snape was hoping Harry would have the answer or was at all disappointed that he didn't. I think he probably would have hated Harry all the more if Harry had answered like Hermione. I've always thought Snape's whole point in the scene was exactly what he did: he asked Harry a question he was pretty sure he wouldn't know to see Harry not knowing it. He's annoyed by Hermione partially because of that, imo. Snape knows he's asking Harry a question your average student would not know, and he's annoyed at her for interrupting his show by actually answering the dang question. The point isn't to answer, the point is for Harry to not answer it to prove he has things to learn. Young Snape might have known the answer too, but he probably would have picked on the fact that the teacher didn't want an answer because he was putting on a power play with a teacher. Not that I'm defending some of Snape's behavior towards Hermione, particularly when he's being too hard on Neville, but I think he's often annoyed with her for interfering with things he's trying to do by jumping in and helping people. It's not that Snape is a super sensitive teacher who's pained when a student doesn't learn himself, imo, but he does have certain things that he tries to do in class via his own methods, and Hermione has trouble letting any teacher do stuff with other students. She jumps in and answers. What Snape's doing is out of line, imo, because anyone can see he's specifically picking on this kid. Harry's right to sense there's something personal and really unhealthy there. There would have been nothing wrong if Snape had asked three impossible questions to three random students as a sign that this would be pop quiz kind of class, even if one of them was Harry. Even if he'd made a passing remark about fame not being the same as wisdom. The problem is the signs of exactly what we find out later about Snape's grudge. Alla: > > I said that I am conceding that this is a special treatment : > > It IS? OK, let's clarify something first, maybe we indeed talk past > each other. I consider "special treatment" as something which person > gets a benefit from. Magpie: I am using the words' actual meaning. Harry is treated as a special person: "surpassing what is common or usual, distinct among others, exceptional" and even "designed or selected for a particular purpose, occasion, or other end." That doesn't always mean something that benefits him or that he enjoys. I'm not forgetting how it is that Harry winds up not only competing in a contest that no other person under 17 is allowed to enter but taking up all the media attention. I know he didn't put his own name in the Goblet and wasn't in control of what the paper printed. I wasn't suggesting a recall for the House Cup victory in first year (it's not the victory itself that's out of line, imo). I'm saying Harry is special, the opposite of ordinary. His problems are exceptional, his triumphs are exceptional. He's surrounded by people who spend far more time focused on him than he does on them. When you're ordinary you tend to look at the special and see more of the good things and dismiss the bad things. When you're special you are more aware of the bad things and can take the good things for granted. Harry is very aware of the difficulties of his fame. He draws attention to them a lot. Otherwise he claims to be completely ordinary, but I think that like many movie stars who claim the same thing, he lacks perspective there. horridporrid: It's rather like a groom waiting to for the bride to make her way down the aisle to tell her he's in love with her maid of honor. It's good for the bride to now before she says "I do", but to quote "The Wedding Singer": "Again, something you could have told me *YESTERDAY*!!" Magpie: Well, yeah! What's with the decking the hall in Slytherin colors that announce they won for the dramatic effect of yanking a cup away from them in the name of Harry and his best friends? All those "not so bad" Slytherins got slapped in the face there as well. I get the point in the book, but I can't imagine anyone would be okay with this sort of thing in real life. As the books go on that becomes more of an odd choice, not less of one. It does seem like that's the point, not that the points just haven't been counted yet and the Slytherins *think* they're going to win. That would be fine--it's not over till it's over. But it seemed like Dumbledore held back giving the points until after the contest was over just to trick everyone. Happy surprise for one Harry Potter and his companions. Who cares about anyone else? Shaun Hately: Honestly, given what Draco sees, and coloured by his experiences, I think that to him, Harry does across as exceedingly arrogant in that encounter on the train. As feeling superior to all wizards. Magpie: Sure. And from his pov he spends most of the conversation chattering about ordinary things like houses and Quidditch and Harry is monosyllabic (because he doesn't know what to say and is uncomfortable about that) and probably not hiding the dislike he's felt since the "bully my parents into buying me a racing broom" remark, which wouldn't have bothered another kid so much. Then Draco shares a juicy piece of gossip about the weird groundskeeper and Harry speaks "coldly" to him. I can totally see Draco's version of the Robe Shop scene, especially once he realized who this kid was, as a case of Harry thought himself above Draco straight off and Draco made a fool of himself trying to talk to him. One thing I always love about that scene is that it is, in fact, the only scene in canon where Harry deals with a wizard who isn't seeing him as Harry Potter. People often claim Ron is doing that on the train, but of course he knows who Harry is. -m -m From coriolan at worldnet.att.net Thu Jan 5 02:54:12 2006 From: coriolan at worldnet.att.net (Caius Marcius) Date: Thu, 05 Jan 2006 02:54:12 -0000 Subject: JKR is a Death Eater? (was:Re: Hobbsian worlds; Crime & Punishment) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 145922 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "lupinlore" wrote: > > It all comes back to the fact that JKR is, I think, sometimes > rather naive about the messages she sends precisely BECAUSE she's > usually focused on the story and doesn't consider as much as she > maybe should the "wider" implications of some of her plot points. > All of which is to say I don't think we'll have a clear and > unconflicted statement on these issues in Book VII -- if only > because it's very late in the day to go into the complexities of > all this. We may very well see some nod at House Unity or Good > Slytherins, but a nod is about all we have time for. Check the > box and move on to the Great Horcrux Hunt. > The greatest literary works - e.g., the Bible, Shakespeare, Joyce - are filled with contradictory and irreconcilable elements. Life and reality, for that matter, are themselves full of contradiction and paradox. Granting much of what you say, you seem to think the narrative incongruities cannot but suggest some flaw (deep-rooted or otherwise) in JKR. I think that the dissonant and disharmonious aspects of the Potter novels are reflective of a literary work of the first magnitude. The "contradictions" you list above will endure that generations yet unborn will go online (or whatever our clever posterity do) to debate the "true" meaning of the Potterverse, just as Shakespearean scholars stil come up with the most widely contradictory theories. - CMC I've put so many enigmas and puzzles [into Ulysses] that it will keep the professors busy for centuries arguing over what I meant, and that's the only way of insuring one's immortality (besides a Horcrux, of course). - James Joyce (parenthetic remarks may be inauthentic) From coverton at netscape.com Wed Jan 4 23:13:45 2006 From: coverton at netscape.com (Corey Overton) Date: Wed, 4 Jan 2006 17:13:45 -0600 Subject: Hermione and Fleur (Re: Merope's life and real abusers and Hermione and Fleur.) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <000101c61184$88f1a190$3b1383ac@Overton> No: HPFGUIDX 145923 zgirnius: > What I think this scene is about is Ron. Hermione > (quite naturally) is irked that Ron is so obviously and > strongly affected by Fleur's physical attractions. This is > the same Ron who claimed only to notice that Hermione was > a girl when he so desperately needed a date in GoF for the > Yule Ball. (I do agree with you about Merope-hence the > snipping...) No problem, man. Now that I remember it was Hermione that said 'not you as well' when referring to Harry. Went back and listened to the tape. Guess if I were Hermione I'd be a little mad about that 'you're a girl' comment too. Your fellow list member, Corey From babyhrndz at yahoo.com Thu Jan 5 02:57:53 2006 From: babyhrndz at yahoo.com (Amanda Shoffner) Date: Wed, 4 Jan 2006 18:57:53 -0800 (PST) Subject: Dumbledore's portrait In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20060105025753.14416.qmail@web30801.mail.mud.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 145924 Martha: > Isn't it possible that Dumbledore made a picture of > himself and placed it in the portrait location in the > headmaster's office? This would eliminate the portrait from > the pool of evidence about Dumbledore being dead. Amanda: Actually, It does state in book six that his portrait was still up there, when Minerva went up there as headmistress. Amanda From antoshachekhonte at yahoo.com Thu Jan 5 03:18:21 2006 From: antoshachekhonte at yahoo.com (antoshachekhonte) Date: Thu, 05 Jan 2006 03:18:21 -0000 Subject: Veela characteristics (RE: comic relief for book 7) In-Reply-To: <000101c61147$f34df300$77e5aeac@Overton> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 145925 Allie: > > On a related topic, we saw Veela transform into ugly fire- > > throwing beasts at the Quidditch World Cup. Fleur is only > > part Veela, but do you think she might have any of those > > abilities in her somewhere, or that it would be significant? > > Corey here. Allie couldn't agree with you more. I think Fleur > would have those characteristics. Don't see why she wouldn't; > besides it gives her one more way to fight the DEs if need be. > Oh and another thing -- if she got mad at someone that might > come out in her as well. > Antosha: It has occured to me that the "one shining day" is a highly likely time and place for a DE attack, and the idea of "Phlegm"--who did such a rotten job in the Triwizard Tournement, and whom the Weasley women resented so in HBP--were to turn into an avenging Fury defending her husband, in book seven. Not comic at all--except possibly the reactions of the Trio and Ginny, who would no doubt be quite surprised. ;-) From annemehr at yahoo.com Thu Jan 5 03:28:26 2006 From: annemehr at yahoo.com (annemehr) Date: Thu, 05 Jan 2006 03:28:26 -0000 Subject: "Stand aside, girl" and the End In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 145926 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Jen Reese" wrote: > JKR said there were places Harry needed to go in Book 5 in order > to 'play fair for the reader in the resolution of Book 7'. So the > Department of Mysteries will be important again. I'm not the first to > suggest Lily worked there, it's just that now the idea she might have > worked in the Veil room and studied death takes on a new meaning given > the information about Voldemort in HBP. His greatest fear is death, > and Dumbledore is the only person he feared probably in part because > he was unafraid to die, so it's fitting Voldemort might find Lily > worrisome if she actually studied death rather than feared it. Annemehr: That's a very interesting idea. I have thought in the past that Voldemort may have told Lily to stand aside because he thought he could make use of her, and I imagined it was her knowledge of Dumbledore he might want. Because, even after Harry was dead, LV would still have had "the only one he ever feared" to deal with, didn't he, and Lily was likely to be a better source of information than Peter Pettigrew, if he could get her. Then, when she refused to move, he just killed her (priorities, you know -- it was killing Harry that mattered most at the time). But in that case, why didn't he just stun her? Siriusly Snapey Susan said: >Heck, maybe his plan was even to turn back >to her after he'd eliminated Harry and see if he couldn't extract >information from her about what she'd learned? He might have >thought of her both as dangerous AND as potentially useful in his >quest to avoid death and achieve immortality. Annemehr: Yes! If Lily studied in the Veil Room, she'd potentially have even more valuable information in LV's eyes than just the scoop on DD -- but, you are right, she might also be much more dangerous to play around with. Why? Because if she defied him and escaped him a fourth time, she may have had time to figure out about the Horcruxes. A stunner can be blocked, but an AK is supposed to be unblockable, so LV might have thought it was playing it safe to use it when "negotiations" failed. And if she might know things about his defenses, the stakes are very high. See, I think it's the combination of all three things that explains it. 1)Wanting to get information from her if possible; thus the "negotiation," but 2)Afraid she may have found a weakness in his immortality or would in the near future, and 3)She had a nasty tendency of "defying him" and escaping, so: a quick AK and down to the business of killing Harry. Alla: >First of all, how did Voldemort >find out that Lily worked in the Veil room or Love room, if she >indeed did? Just asking for your speculations, of course. Snape or >Peter or something else? Annemehr: Augustus Rookwood. Also an Unspeakable, who was never even known to be a DE until some time after Lily's death, and perfectly placed for casual *shop talk* with her about what she was working on. In fact, it may be that something she said to him was responsible for the timing of the attack -- maybe she began to get a bit too close to the truth for comfort. Hmmm... maybe while we're here, we can wangle a theory about what he was using Ludo Bagman for, too. Do you suppose the Quidditch World Cup is a Horcrux? ;) Annemehr resolving to be more here this year From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Thu Jan 5 03:34:23 2006 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Thu, 05 Jan 2006 03:34:23 -0000 Subject: Who was with Voldemort at GH? Pettigrew In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 145927 Lia wrote: > The question of who accompanied LV is one that's pestered me for some time. For some reason, I had always assumed (dangerous to do) that Voldemort was alone. LV often acts alone, and is depicted in many ways throughout the canon as solitary, even when surrounded by others. Still, others have raised the issue of accompaniment, and it would seem that someone else might have been there. My guess here would be either Snape or Bellatrix--because it would explain the actions and behavior of either in later events. Carol responds: Almost certainly the person (rat) who accompanied LV was Wormtail, who returned LV's wand (and robes) to him in GoF. We know that Voldemort's wand was used to kill Cedric and to fight Harry (the brother wand effect, Priori Incantatem, etc.) Voldemort could not have had his own wand unless Wormtail returned it to him. An admittedly unconfirmed excerpt from a young fan's report supports this interpretation: "I also asked when Harries [sic] parents were killed by Voldermort, Wormtail turned into a rat and pretended to be dead. How then did he give Voldermort [sic] his wand and robe back once he found him and helped give him back his body?, she told me (after tapping her nose!) 'he hid them'." Setting aside the kid's spelling, this tidbit has the ring of authenticity, especially the nose-tapping gesture. Wormtail probably showed Voldemort which house was the Potters, then hid and watched the proceedings in rat form, which would explain why neither James nor Lily in Harry's admittedly fragmentary memories seemed to know he was present. Afterwards, Wormtail could have hidden the wand and robes and then reported the crime to the Aurors, who would not have suspected him of complicity in the murders, pretending that he had arrived on the scene just as the house exploded and ran (Apparated) immediately for help. He could also have told them that Sirius was the Secret Keeper and must have informed Voldemort of their identity. He could even have gone to Dumbledore, weeping copious crocodile tears, but I don't think he would have done so because he would have had to explain why he had left Harry alive in the ruins. Anyway, Wormtail was almost certainly present and could well have been the person who reported the murder to the Aurors and the papers as a first step in his plot to frame Sirius Black. I've already stated that Snape could not have been present, since he was already teaching at Hogwarts (and had been spying for DD for some time bdfore that), and it's most unlikely that Bellatrix would have informed the Aurors or the Daily Prophet, yet the Potters' deaths, the disappearance of Voldemort, and Harry's miraculous survival were common knowledge in the WW by the next morning. Unless Dumbledore Apparated to Godric's Hollow with Hagrid and then left him in charge while he (DD) reported the events to the Aurors and the Daily Prophet, which seems OOC, Wormtail, the "innocent" friend of the Potters looks like the best candidate for a witness to the events. And just possibly Harry, to whom he owes a life debt, can get the truth out of him. It's possible that Bellatrix was also there, which would explain why she considered Wormtail to be a traitor, but I think the Potters would have noticed her ("Lily, I'll fight Voldemort. You hold off Bellatrix!") and it would have been much harder for Peter to retrieve the wand and robes is Bella was also present. She would have wanted to return them to her master herself when he returned. So I think the only witness to Godric's Hollow is the Potter's betrayer, Pettigrew. Carol, dreading the absence of birthday wishes to SS on JKR's site January 9 From h2so3f at yahoo.com Thu Jan 5 04:18:13 2006 From: h2so3f at yahoo.com (h2so3f) Date: Thu, 05 Jan 2006 04:18:13 -0000 Subject: First potions lesson/Harry getting special treatment In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 145928 Magpie wrote: "I think the main point here that's getting lost here is that regardless of whether Harry could have done this, the point was that he wouldn't. I really don't think Snape was hoping Harry would have the answer or was at all disappointed that he didn't. I think he probably would have hated Harry all the more if Harry had answered like Hermione." CH3ed: I think Alla and Magpie are right on this one. Sure, Hermione showed that it was possible for 11 yrs old newcomer to the WW could have learned everything in the textbooks (intended to be learned over the whole year) by the first lesson, but it is unrealistic to expect that to happen. It is the difference between possibility and plausibility. I think Magpie has it right that Snape actually expected Harry to not know the answers. That class was the first time Harry and Snape were face to face, but we've noticed from Harry' eye that ever since Snape first laid eye on Harry at Hogwarts at the Great Hall he looked at Harry with utter hatred(that Harry didn't know the cause of). Magpie wrote: " Harry is very aware of the difficulties of his fame. He draws attention to them a lot. Otherwise he claims to be completely ordinary, but I think that like many movie stars who claim the same thing, he lacks perspective there." CH3ed: You're probably right there, but I'd say Harry's perspective is remarkably well developed considering his fame. He doesn't take a lot for granted (he was even surprised when Fudge wouldn't punish him for blowing up his aunt in PoA). It also seems to me Harry's "special treatments" aren't always of the favorable kind. Snape treats him specially bad... so did Umbridge.. and Fudge during OotP. His fellow students seem prone to over-react with Harry's ordeal. They're either cheering him with admiration or teasing or shunning him after any rumor of his 'bad behaviors.' Harry was even ashame of wishing his absence would be noticed as he laid injured and immobile on the train. Betsy HP wrote: "Dumbledore didn't just reward Gryffindor, he punished Slytherin. It was an odd choice, and it never sat well with me. (Personally, I think he's trying to make up for the Norbert incident, and it does win Harry back into Gryffindor's good graces, but at what cost?)" Alla wrote: "Again, he awarded well deserved points. It may not have sit well with Slytherin pride, but the point was made Gryffindor gets special tretment here. To me special means undeserved, unless you argue that Trio did not deserve those points, I don't see any special treatment here. As to why awarding during the Feast. well, why not? They behaved like Heroes and IMO School should honor their heroes." CH3ed: I think the last minute change in House Cup scoring by DD in PS/SS actually made Neville the hero. The trio's points just brought Gryffindor up to a tie with Slytherin. But it was Neville's 10 points that won the cup. It may not have seem fair to the Slytherins but I do think the Trio's points were well deserved. They risked their lives and twarted the return of the most evil wizard of the age (a task their own teachers failed to do or anticipated (except maybe for DD)). And I'm glad DD recognized Neville's action(or good intention). DD could have given just enough points to cause a tie between Slytherin and Gryffindor, of course, but then that would seem to equate the significance of the defeat of LV with what a school house can normally do. ay? CH3ed :O) From midnightowl6 at hotmail.com Thu Jan 5 04:30:32 2006 From: midnightowl6 at hotmail.com (P J) Date: Wed, 04 Jan 2006 23:30:32 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: First Potions lesson In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 145929 Orna: I don't think so not on earth. I just said that Snape, who probably hadn't any information of how Harry spent his first 11 years, could assume that he was raised in a family glorifying his parents, and allowing him to read books. PJ: Ok, but if Snape is so close to Dumbledore WHY doesn't he know this stuff about Harry? It's no secret since, when asked by McG. Dumbledore tells her clearly where Harry will live and, most importantly, why. he didn't fudge or hesitate with her at all! For Snape to think Harry has lived a life of ease and glory for the past 11 years suggests that he's seriously out of the loop with Dumbledore. At least it does to me and if that's true, the rest of the books take on a whole new light with Snape, don't they? PJ From annemehr at yahoo.com Thu Jan 5 04:30:18 2006 From: annemehr at yahoo.com (annemehr) Date: Thu, 05 Jan 2006 04:30:18 -0000 Subject: "Stand aside, girl" and the End In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 145930 Orna wrote: > > Actually ? what's the meaning of locking love in a room? I find this > > picture quite intriguing. What's the meaning of locking it in a > > room, what are the dangers of it? > > Annemehr: Perhaps people kept going in and never wanting to come out. It must take years to train an Unspeakable, not to mention getting all the security clearances; they don't want them all wanting nothing to do but to just sit in the one room. > La Gatta Lucianese(replying to Orna): > > This has a curious resonance with Snape's claim that he can teach his > students "how to bottle fame, brew glory, even stopper death". We know > from Slughorn that it is possible to brew good fortune--the Felix > Felicis potion. Is it also possible to concentrate and store up love > until it is needed (that is, real love, not passion, the usual outcome > of so-called "love" potions)? Annemehr: On this list, it used to be common to identify the phrase "stopper death" with sleeping potion known as the Draught of the Living Death. I've been mostly absent since HBP, though -- is that phrase putting people in mind of Horcruxes these days? As for storing up love, that may be -- but I would guess the way JKR would write it you could not *brew* real love like a potion, but you may be able to store it in little phials like you can store thoughts. > >Orna: > >About further duelling - I rather think voldemort would tamper with > >his wand, than giving up the final duel. Perhaps, as someone > >suggested, that's why Ollivander has disappeared. > > > La Gatta Lucianese: > > And Ollivander has been hanging out with the Terrible Twins in Diagon > Alley, so when Voldemort points his wand at Harry and shouts, "Avada > Kedavra!", it turns into a rubber snake that explodes in a shower of > sparkes and a strong odor of dungbomb... > > (I couldn't resist!) Annemehr: I wouldn't be surprised! And that, of course, is when the Possession battle begins... From annemehr at yahoo.com Thu Jan 5 04:48:55 2006 From: annemehr at yahoo.com (annemehr) Date: Thu, 05 Jan 2006 04:48:55 -0000 Subject: RAB's identity and significance / SHIP: H/G / is Dumbledore dead? / Neville' In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 145931 > > Valky: > > Neville's significance has been two times out of three connected with > > an orb shaped object. ie the Rememberall and the Prophecy Orb. If > > there is anything to this pattern then it is certain that Nevilles > > very significant role in Book Seven will involve an orb shaped thing. > > Any Ideas? > La Gatta Lucianese: > The Russian bogeyman Koschei the Deathless was, in fact, deathless > because he stored his soul in a magical egg, which he then kept very > well hidden. If the egg was destroyed, he would die. > Perhaps JKR, who has admitted to a love of folklore, draws on this > story; the last (?) Horcrux is something egg-shaped or orb-shaped (the > Ravenclaw Horcrux?), and Neville is instrumental in helping Harry to > destroy it and destroy Voldemort. Annemehr: Suppose Rowena Ravenclaw was a seer, and she had a favorite crystal ball? What do you suppose would happen to someone who tried to gaze into a crystal ball containing a bit of Voldemort's soul? Only, if that turned out to be true, it would be Luna who I'd see being the one who could look into it and come out unscathed. Annemehr From AllieS426 at aol.com Thu Jan 5 05:08:30 2006 From: AllieS426 at aol.com (allies426) Date: Thu, 05 Jan 2006 05:08:30 -0000 Subject: Drinking the potion, sparing Lily and fearing DD was: Interrview quote re: Lily & Voldemort In-Reply-To: <700201d40601041453k42ba679ar6cc959a75158b32d@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 145932 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Kemper wrote: > > On a side note... Does anyone else think DD reacted rashly with regards to > the potion? Why didn't DD save a vial of the potion to take back to > Hogwarts and have one of his two Potion Masters develop an antidote? I > wonder if RAB took a vial to his old Potions Professor. I wonder if that > professor went into hiding for the first time after learning of RAB's death > shortly after helping RAB with an antidote. > . Allie: Absolutely!! My thought was, "Are you crazy, there must be some other way!" If he really was dying from the hand injury, maybe it had to be that night. Or maybe it would take too long to develop an antidote. Or maybe he *knew* what the potion was. In that case, why wouldn't he tell Harry (unless he knew it was a slow-acting poison)? And I know that Dumbledore does not lie to Harry, but I did not fall for, "Lord Voldemort would not have wanted to kill the drinker right away." Harry believed that to mean, "The potion will not kill me." I heard it as, "The potion will kill me later." From kjones at telus.net Thu Jan 5 05:15:31 2006 From: kjones at telus.net (Kathryn Jones) Date: Wed, 04 Jan 2006 21:15:31 -0800 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: First potions lesson/Harry getting special treatment In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <43BCAB73.6010301@telus.net> No: HPFGUIDX 145933 > Betsy HP wrote: > "Dumbledore didn't just reward Gryffindor, he punished Slytherin. It > was an odd choice, and it never sat well with me. (Personally, I > think he's trying to make up for the Norbert incident, and it does > win Harry back into Gryffindor's good graces, but at what cost?)" > Alla wrote: > "Again, he awarded well deserved points. It may not have sit well > with Slytherin pride, but the point was made Gryffindor gets special > tretment here. To me special means undeserved, unless you argue that > Trio did not deserve those points, I don't see any special treatment > here. As to why awarding during the Feast. well, why not? They > behaved like Heroes and IMO School should honor their heroes." KJ writes: I particularly like the first line of this post. To me, it was in very poor taste to allow the Slytherin colours to be displayed as the winners prior to the giving of the extra points. Yes, the Trio and Neville deserved the points. I don't think anyone has an argument with that. I do not understand why it was necessary for Dumbledore to make the point that he did, by literally stripping away Slytherin's win and giving it to the Gryffs in that manner. In point of fact, I don't know what point he was making. I don't think that Dumbledore did things thoughtlessly, or without reasons of his own. I also don't think that it was meant to be a foolish preference for Gryffindor House. There is no doubt that the way that this was done clearly demonstrated preferential treatment. From AllieS426 at aol.com Thu Jan 5 05:39:40 2006 From: AllieS426 at aol.com (allies426) Date: Thu, 05 Jan 2006 05:39:40 -0000 Subject: other ways to destroy Voldemort Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 145934 I do not believe for a second that Harry will "kill" Voldemort or even attempt an Avada Kedavra. There was a big scene in OoTP with the closed ward where Neville's parents appeared and Gilderoy Lockhart reappeared. To use Draco's phrase, the ward for people with "Brains that had been addled by magic." Maybe it will have larger significance to the plot? Maybe Voldemort will end up that way. It would ensure that he was no threat (if he can't remember anything, he can't remember to take over the WW, right?). I can think of a few possible ways that this might happen - * Voldemort tries to possess Harry for too long and Harry's power of love drives him insane * with his Horcruxes destroyed, Voldemort doesn't have enough soul left to function normally The only problem I see is that the prophecy reads, "either must die at the hand of the other," and in this scenario Voldemort would not be dead. (Well, spiritually he would be I guess.) They would have to station security around the ward to prevent other people from assassinating him!! Allie (wondering if the WW has the death penalty or if Sirius was a special case when he escaped from Azkaban) (wondering if there are other prisons besides Azkaban for petty thieves and other minor criminals) (wondering why what Lockhart did with his permanent memory charms is not considered Unforgivable, whereas even a brief Imperio would be) From juli17 at aol.com Thu Jan 5 06:46:28 2006 From: juli17 at aol.com (juli17 at aol.com) Date: Thu, 5 Jan 2006 01:46:28 EST Subject: JKR is a Death Eater? (was:Re: Hobbsian worlds; Crime & Punishment) Message-ID: <159.5f068f0e.30ee1ac4@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 145936 Lupinlore wrote: I'll have to say that if JKR really wanted to show us a classical "liberal" scenario, she missed a golden opportunity with Voldy's backstory. Do we find great moral struggles, human emotion, and sympathetic portrayal in the Fall of Tom Riddle? Nope. Kid was born evil, strange even as a baby, snake in the bosom of Hogwarts, DD never trusted him, yada, yada, yada. Julie: Actually, I did feel sympathy for Tom the child, as did Harry. JKR told us that Voldemort is less responsible for his actions (as compared to Snape) because he was never loved. This to me is a fairly liberal notion, that a lack of love in a child's formative years can have disastrous consequences. I also don't recall any inferences that Tom was *born* evil. Yes, his mother's family was full of degenerates but as far as we know there was nothing wrong with his father's family. Even most of Merope's problems seemed to come from the way her family treated her, rather than any inborn dysfunction. And again, there have been studies that show infants raised without human contact or affection suffer serious emotional setbacks. So environment plays a strong part. Lupinlore: I think that JKR actually gives less thought to these issues than people believe. I think she's concerned by her story, with philosophical and religious issues mostly serving as the unstated foundation. That is why people find these things contradictory and unclear in the Potterverse. People's basic outlooks on life and morality often are unclear and contradictory. I think JKR probably laughed out loud when she wrote the ferret sequence and the ten-ton-tongue scene. She probably also felt genuine sympathy with Dudley when faced with dementors and for Draco in the bathroom scene. Julie: Perhaps things are contradictory and unclear in the Potterverse because JKR wanted to reflect that people's basic outlook on life and morality (thus that of any society) is often unclear and contradictory. I'd also note that while JKR may have laughed out loud while writing the above scenes (as many readers did while reading them) she did not neglect to comment on the questionable morality of those acts by having the instigators (the Weasley twins, and Fake!Moody) dressed down immediately by characters with unquestionable moral fiber (Arthur and McGonagall respectively). Lupinlore: Such contradictory messages often aren't even very subtle in canon or even in JKR's interviews. We have a headmaster who loudly proclaims his care for his students yet seems willing to let Draco go on with his bumbling activities that almost kill two of said beloved students. We have an emphasis on choice and a villain who was born evil, the product of a degenerate and poisoned bloodline. We have denunciation of race-prejudice and important and ancient magic that validates, in a way, the emphasis the DEs place on ancestry and blood ties. Julie: Which ancient magic? Lupinlore: And we have a writer who seemed shocked and surprised when asked why Slytherin House still exists but who has persistantly shown Slytherin House as being the nerve center and home of Voldemort's supporters at Hogwarts. Or was I the only one who read that statement about how the DEs would have supporters in all houses and how Draco and his gang are only a small portion of Slytherin and thought: "Okay, it would have been nice to show us that before now, you know, instead of having to tell us at the eleventh hour in an interview. Now if you do show us any of that it will have the inevitable feel of box-checking." Julie: I interpreted this interview differently than you did. JKR didn't seem shocked or surprised to me. She answered, and said "You must remember I have thought about this..." And she intimated that it was intentional that "You are seeing Slytherin from the perspective of Death Eater's chldren." Perhaps in that way she is emphasizing the rift between the Houses (as between countries/ethnic groups) is partly because the the parties look no *further* than their own set prejudices, seeing only the "stereotypical" version of the other. Thus Harry (who is our eyes, after all) does not look beyond the few Slytherins he knows (and who are children of Death Eaters) to judge ALL Slytherins as devious, evil Voldemort supporters. And unless the parties look beyond the stereotypes and see *themselves* in each other, they can never unite, and never stop hating. Which of course resonates strongly in the real world. Lupinlore: It all comes back to the fact that JKR is, I think, sometimes rather naive about the messages she sends precisely BECAUSE she's usually focused on the story and doesn't consider as much as she maybe should the "wider" implications of some of her plot points. All of which is to say I don't think we'll have a clear and unconflicted statement on these issues in Book VII -- if only because it's very late in the day to go into the complexities of all this. We may very well see some nod at House Unity or Good Slytherins, but a nod is about all we have time for. Check the box and move on to the Great Horcrux Hunt. Julie: I don't think she's naive at all. And as for the "wider implications" of her plot points, she can't control her reader's interpretations. And implications are by definition open to interpretation. We've already argued here the "Is Snape abusive?" issue to death, to no agreed-upon resolution.It's also almost impossible for a writer to make a "clear and unconflicted" statement, because you can be certain there will never be a 100% agreement by readers about the meaning of anything--at least not anything well-written. That's the *point* of a well-written book, to make you think, sometimes to the point of never reaching a clear conclusion. Julie [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From Aisbelmon at hotmail.com Thu Jan 5 06:53:31 2006 From: Aisbelmon at hotmail.com (M.Clifford) Date: Thu, 05 Jan 2006 06:53:31 -0000 Subject: First potions lesson/Harry getting special treatment In-Reply-To: <43BCAB73.6010301@telus.net> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 145937 > > Betsy HP wrote: > > "Dumbledore didn't just reward Gryffindor, he punished Slytherin. > > It was an odd choice, and it never sat well with me. (Personally, > > I think he's trying to make up for the Norbert incident, and it > > does win Harry back into Gryffindor's good graces, but at what > > cost?)" > KJ writes: > > I particularly like the first line of this post. To me, it was in > very poor taste to allow the Slytherin colours to be displayed as > the winners prior to the giving of the extra points. Yes, the Trio > and Neville deserved the points. I don't think anyone has an > argument with that. I do not understand why it was necessary for > Dumbledore to make the point that he did, by literally stripping > away Slytherin's win and giving it to the Gryffs in that manner. In > point of fact, I don't know what point he was making. Valky: I do believe there is a simple answer to this question, and that it was answered within PS/SS. Our problem seems to be that as the series and the trio matured the significance of that has, naturally, faded. IIRC it is first established that Slytherin had won the House Cup for 8 years running (or a similarly large number), and throughout the PS/SS story it is hinted (sledgehammer fashion) that a lot (read most) of Slytherin's success in the House Cup over that time had been gained as a result of cheating (Quidditch), scheming (Draco), abuses of power (Snape) and all other manner of unscrupulous behaviour. KJ: > I don't think that Dumbledore did things > thoughtlessly, or without reasons of his own. I also don't think > that it was meant to be a foolish preference for Gryffindor House. Valky: Exactly! It looked as though Dumbledore was punishing Slytherin House, because he *was*, in a sense. And some may say why didn't he do this before if Slytherin had always been cheating but there was one large difference in this year compared to the ones coming before - a group of kids from Gryffindor house other had done something remarkable. DD then was able to fairly give a gigantic points boost big enough to overcome Slytherin's usual ridiculous lead. Basically I think the point is that Harry and Co had done them all (DD and Hogwarts including Slytherin) a favour because his actions had enabled Dumbledore the means to demonstrate the true meaning of House virtue to the school. JMHO Valky Hoping the Listelves will please excuse the previous attempt at this post which was poorly edited. From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Thu Jan 5 07:11:21 2006 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Thu, 05 Jan 2006 07:11:21 -0000 Subject: CHAPDISC: HBP7, The Slug Club In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 145938 > > 1. This is the beginning of what will be a year-long obsession with Draco for Harry. In hindsight, what does this reveal about Harry's powers of discernment? > Betsy Hp responded: > Draco is not just a happy little Death Eater in training. I > think this insight coupled with his blindspot regarding Draco's > humanity is what leads to Harry being petrified on the compartment > floor, completely at Draco's mercy. Carol: Rather than answering the question, I'm just going to respond to this portion of Betsy's comment. I agree that Harry underestimated Draco in this scene but I don't see how this incident relates to Draco's humanity. Harry's eavesdropping reveals Draco feeling miffed and making excuses for being left out of the Slug Club and bragging about the mysterious mission that Voldemort has assigned to him, but Draco's humanity (or perhaps we should say his "humanness," since "humanity" implies compassion) isn't all that evident here. And his "mercy" is nonexistent--he petrifies Harry, stomps on his face and breaks his nose, covers him with the invisibility cloak so he won't be found, but takes care to observe where his hand is so he can tread on it on his way out. He certainly seems like a happy little Death Eater to me (aside from his disappointment regarding the Slug Club). Good thing his mission wasn't to AK the Chosen One. It would have been all too easy. (Draco does make a mistake, though, leaving the blinds down so that Tonks can deduce which compartment Harry is in.) I'm assuming you meant mercy ironically since IMO neither mercy nor humanity is much in evidence here. As for Harry's powers of discernment, possibly they're improving. He's certainly right that Draco is up to no good and I think he's correct about the Dark Mark, though I don't know for sure. But he and his friends have had five years to practice their detective skills. It's about time we saw at least one of them arriving at a correct conclusion, especially since DD won't be there at the end of the book to unravel the mystery. I don't think his more or less accurate assessment of Draco has any bearing on that great enigma, Snape, however. Harry, as we'll see in the next chapter, is determined to see the worst in him. And when has Snape ever broken Harry's nose, left him to be sent back to London under an invisible cloak, and trodden on his hand as a final gesture of hatred and contempt? I'm not talking about the tower scene here; it hasn't occurred yet and we really don't know the full story, I'll bet my HP books on it ('cause if we do know the whole story and Harry is right, I don't want them any more, thank you.) > > 2. The Aurors in the scene are men we have never seen before. Is this done to highlight the changes at the Ministry of Magic, or is there some more sinister reason? Carol responds: I don't think there's anything sinister about it--unless Scrimgeour is sinister. They reflect his ex-Auror, G-man (I don't know the British equivalent) style of running things. Efficient anonymity, or the appearance thereof. Tonks and Moody are conspicuously absent, either because they're assigned elsewhere (Tonks, of course, meets the train) or because they would call attention to themselves or both. I'm not altogether sure that Scrimgeour trusts them, given his suspicions that the Order was hiding Sirius Black the previous year, even though SB is now known to be innocent of the murders he was imprisoned for and is of course dead. Scrimgeour seems to be a by-the-book, law-and-order man. Bet he got on swimmingly with Barty Sr. before Barty was Imperio'd. And there's a real contrast to Fudge with his pin-striped cloak and green bowler hat in these bearded, Muggle-looking Aurors. Could Scrimgeour be trying to draw Muggle Britain's attention away from the WW and its troubles, in contrast to Fudge's well-intentioned if patronizing visits to the Muggle PM? > > > 3. Compare this train scene with the early train scene in OOP. How do his feelings toward Neville and Luna compare in the two scenes? What does this scene do for our understanding of the Harry in HBP? Carol responds: Harry is beginning to understand through Neville and Luna that forgetfulness and eccentricity do not in themselves make people worthless, that appearances can be deceiving (a lesson Harry still hasn't learned with Snape), that courage and resourcefulness and loyalty and other virtues are not confined to "cool" people (like poor Cedric, whom he didn't fully appreciate for other reasons) or to Gryffindors. It's a step toward growing up, a step, maybe, toward house unity (if Harry somehow finds himself back at Hogwarts). Neville and Luna will never take the place of Ron and Hermione in his affections, but at least he's coming to understand and appreciate them and to defend them against the Romilda Vanes (a Gryffindor, yet!) of Hogwarts. (Side note: We see some unpleasant Gryffindors, including Romilda and McClaggen, whose first name escapes me. So while we've yet to meet a likeable Slytherin kid, at least we've met some unlikeable Gryffindors aside from Pompous Percy. It's a start.) > > 4. In this chapter, Harry spends time with people of two very different rungs on the social ladder: the Slug Club -v- Neville and Luna (whose lack of popularity is touched upon several times in this chapter Discuss Harry's very different opinions of the two social circles. Carol: Not much to say here that I haven't already said in response to question 3. Harry seems to have taken the measure of Slughorn pretty accurately (assuming that the narrator's observations reflect his perspective. He sees how quickly Slughorn discards Belby, for example, and he understands his motives for including everyone present. He's not particularly eager to associate with McClaggen, Gryffindor or not, especially since his father is a friend of Scrimgeour's, and he's certainly not eager to associate with a haughty, arrogant Slytherin like Blaise Zabini who, we find out later, regards Ginny as "a filthy little blood traitor." Side note on Blaise, whom some people expected to be the Good Slytherin. I feel as if he's one of the boxes that Lupinlore, I mean JKR, checked off her list. She's shown him to us and he nicely illustrates Sirius Black's little aphorism, "The world isn't divided into good people and Death Eaters, Harry." Except for his views on blood, Blaise reminds me of the young Sirius Black--handsome, arrogant, haughty, too good for everyone (except, in Sirius's case, the equally "cool," athletically talented, rich, clever, outgoing James Potter). But Blaise, interestingly and ironically, is black. In the Muggle world of a hundred or so years ago, he would have been the victim of racism, but in the WW he's a proponent of its equivalent, blood prejudice. Race doesn't matter in the least to Slytherins or any other Wizards or we'd certainly hear some foul insults from Draco's mouth, but magical blood does. And Blaise, whose mother appears to be a "black widow" in the sense of a spider who kills her mates (no connection with her race), holds Draco's DE father in contempt. He's a little hypocrite, he's not in the least likeable, he's a bigot, but he's not likely to be recruited by Voldemort. And he's also a plot device. JKR needs a Slytherin other than Draco to be present at the Slug Club meeting so Harry can follow him and eavesdrop; he also needs someone who can talk about Theo Nott, who rather oddly isn't present in what the narrator refers to as the sixth-year Slytherin compartment. Neither, of course, is Pansy Parkinson's "gang of Slytherin girls." Maybe they're all falling over Theo in some other compartment, though I rather doubt it. (Theo was my candidate for Good Slytherin and I'm still hoping we'll see more of him. I just hope he doesn't drop out of Hogwarts to join Draco and share his "glory.") > > >>(question 4 continued): > > What about Draco's perception of where he is on the social ladder? (the attempt to impress that seemingly was trigger by being snubbed by Slughorn, his relationship with Pansy who seems determined to form some kind of attachment to him, etc.) Carol: I agree with Betsy that Draco's attachment to Pansy, and more particularly hers to him, was already formed. If a boy like Draco has a girl who's the leader of her own little gang falling all over him, he's not going to refuse her attentions. (Harry's prejudices may be showing in the narrator's references to Pansy as a girl with a face like a pug. Interestingly, the description doesn't appear in HBP.) We've seen that Pansy really does care about Draco; she went running after him in tears when he was hurt by the hippogriff (sp?). Pansy has a softer side that she conceals (she liked the unicorns, for example) and she strikes me as rather naive. She's going after the top-ranking boy in her circle, the one who has always been the leader or the Slytherins, and she sees his orders from "*Him*" (Voldemort) as glamorous and his mysterious mission as necessarily admirable, a cause for increased devotion. But Draco can't tell her what it is, and later he turns to a Mudblood ghost for comfort instead of Pansy, a flesh-and-blood girl who, for all her faults, really cares about him. What would she think if she knew what he was trying to do? Would she help him or turn away in horror? Would she scorn him as a fool or pity him when he seems doomed to failure and death? Is she another Narcissa in the making, fiercely devoted to Draco as Narcissa is to her husband and son? Pansy is in for a rude awakening in Book 7. I only hope we get to see it. > > > 5. Neville mentions that his wand may have been the last Ollivander sold before he vanished. Do you think this is one of those throwaway lines that will be significant later? How? Carol: It's certainly a hint that we'll find out what's up with Ollivander. I, for one, don't think he's dead. Voldemort wants something from him--and it doesn't hurt to take him out of circulation, either, so that LV's enemies are forced to buy inferior wands for their children. I'm just glad that Neville found an Ollivander wand, or rather that an Ollivander wand chose him. > > 6. What is the composition of Neville's wand, and will it be important? Carol: Cherry wood and unicorn hair, as others have said. Loveliest of trees, the cherry now Is hung with snow along the bough . . . . Pure white blossoms which, in combination with the unicorn hair, suggest innocence ("pure as the driven snow," as Magpie said). And someone else pointed out the Druidic(?) associations of cherry wood, which include success in finding (Horcruxes??), unification, competition, and war. The triumph of innocence? Dumbledore talks about the purity of Harry's heart (or is it his soul?), but IMO, Neville has him beat, never having felt hatred or vengeance that we know of. Let's hope he doesn't start hating Snape and that he finds the strength to defeat Bellatrix without killing her or resorting to her own favorite weapon, Cruciatus. > > 7. Luna comes up with yet another ? er ? quirky creature. What are the chances that Luna's wacky creatures will be proven real? And if so, which ones? > Betsy Hp: > My only interest in this is if somehow Luna proves Hermione wrong about something. It'd be a funny scene and would probably do Hermione some good. Carol: Ah, well. I thought she would come back from her summer holiday having actually found a heliopath or whatever creature it was that she and her father were after, if only to show Hermione that books aren't the answer to everything and can even be wrong. (I mean, we thought dragons, unicorns, and hippogriffs were mythical beasts till JKR set us straight, right? Those other books were wrong! Well, okay, I really do know that the HP books are fiction but I prefer suspending my disbelief.) So I guess Betsy and I agree on this one. > > > 8. As we learn about each student's connections during Slughorn's luncheon party, whose story, if any, do you suppose will prove to be important in book 7? Carol: Hm. Possibly McClaggan's connection with Scrimgeour will amount to something, but as I said above, I think Blaise Zabini was mostly a plot device (and an illustration of a person who upholds the Slytherin pureblood ethic without being a budding Death Eater). Personally, I hope to see more of Theo Nott, who, like Draco, was excluded from the Slug Club because of his father. Maybe Draco, whose actions in HBP (attempted murder, an Imperius Curse, accessory to DD's murder, aiding and abetting Death Eaters, endangerment of the staff and students of Hogwarts) have surely made him an outlaw, will hide out with Theo during the summer? Then again, I suppose he could elope to America with Pansy. We just don't know. (Skipping question 10 because I answered it here and above.) > > 11. I find the end of this chapter difficult to read, wishing at an emotional level that Harry would use more caution. Harry's impulsiveness has gotten him into scrapes before, and he once again takes a chance and loses. How do you think this tendency will play out? Carol: Harry might just as well be Sirius's son as James's for all the caution he shows. (I think James took risks for fun, but Sirius was out-and-out reckless, and Harry seems to be following in his footsteps.) The incident with Draco on the train certainly didn't teach him a lesson, as shown by his experimenting with Sectum Sempra later and raging at Snape even though he thought Snape wanted to kill him. He hasn't learned from the Pensieve incident with Snape, either, apparently. Harry will have to learn self-control on a number of levels (resisting impulses and controlling his temper in particular), and he doesn't have very much time. Still, he's the hero of the books, and I think at the last moment he'll make the right decision, whatever that decision may be. I have no doubt that he'll defeat Voldemort and only a little doubt that he'll survive himself, but I hope it will be through learning the lessons he still needs to learn and not through luck. He shouldn't win because he's JKR's idea of the Virtuous Hero and therefore deserves to win. He should win because he's earned his victory. If he's really Dumbledore's Man through and through then he'd best remember Dumbledore's words about right vs. easy and trusting Severus Snape and defeating Voldemort through Love, not through vengeance or recklessness. Carol, with apologies for writing a tome when she thought she had nothing to say From Aisbelmon at hotmail.com Thu Jan 5 07:12:52 2006 From: Aisbelmon at hotmail.com (M.Clifford) Date: Thu, 05 Jan 2006 07:12:52 -0000 Subject: The Locked Room WAS Re: "Stand aside, girl" and the End In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 145939 > Orna wrote: > > > Actually ? what's the meaning of locking love in a room? I find > > > this picture quite intriguing. What's the meaning of locking it > > > in a room, what are the dangers of it? > > > Valky: How interesting Orna, I was just talking about the very same thing in another forum. And I am with you on this. I sense the room is as dangerous as it is good. A permanent lock on the room is only our first indication of this, too, there is also the damage that is done to Harry's knife when he pokes it into the room, the knife can never be used again, there is the agony felt by Voldemort when he comes into contact with it in Harry, so much so that he flees the Ministry and doesn't return, and there are Dumbledore's words at the end of OOTP - a force that is at once more wonderful and terrible than death. I think the hints are there but it is easy to overlook, the room of love is as full of love's cruelty and pain as it is love's sweet and light. Valky From finwitch at yahoo.com Thu Jan 5 08:59:23 2006 From: finwitch at yahoo.com (finwitch) Date: Thu, 05 Jan 2006 08:59:23 -0000 Subject: First potions lesson/Harry getting special treatment In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 145940 > > > KJ writes: > > > > I particularly like the first line of this post. To me, it was in > > very poor taste to allow the Slytherin colours to be displayed as > > the winners prior to the giving of the extra points. Finwitch: It may be that in the Welcoming Feast all Houses are presented in the decoration, and in case of death (Cedric Diggory) the decoration is black - otherwise the colours of the leading house are shown in decoration. They *always* know the leading house, don't they? Slytherin was leading until the points Dumbledore awarded. Therefore the decoration was in their colour. Finwitch From zgirnius at yahoo.com Thu Jan 5 09:04:41 2006 From: zgirnius at yahoo.com (zgirnius) Date: Thu, 05 Jan 2006 09:04:41 -0000 Subject: DD descendents -Generation Nitpick In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 145941 > > > > Ffred: > > > > Generations in the RW are, as you rightly say, about 30 years. > > But, given the longer wizarding life span ...edited... That > > would suggest to me that a generation is around 90 years in the > > WW to allow for the longer lifespans obviously, given shorter > > Muggle lives, a mixed marriage would have children earlier and > > there would be, as in our own world, a spread of parental ages > > around the average .... > > > > hwyl > > > > Ffred > > bboyminn: > So regardless of the fact that wizards live longer, the span of each > theoretical generation would be the same; about 20 years. The > differences is that wizards could spawn more than one generation. > Wizards could marry at 20 and have 3 kids in 5 years, and wait for > those kids to grow to be age 20 and have kids of their own. Then the > original wizard parents could take a break of 20 years and still be > young enough to start having kids again, thereby spawing a second new > generation. zgirnius: Well, yes, but only if over the past two centuries the pattern has been for witches to produce children starting at the age of 20. This certainly seems to have been the pattern in the generation of the parents of current/recent Hogwarts students. Andromeda and Narcissa Black fit this pattern, as does Molly Weasley, and Lily Evans. But some of this might have been driven by the First War (as Molly suggests). It is certainly possible that if the longer lifespan of wizards/witches is correlated with many more childbearing years for witches, that many witches under more ordinary circumstances put off childbearing until later in their lives, which WOULD produce longer generations as Ffred suggests. Of course, we do not know whether witches experience menopause later than Muggle women... From vuurdame at xs4all.nl Thu Jan 5 09:40:29 2006 From: vuurdame at xs4all.nl (festuco) Date: Thu, 05 Jan 2006 09:40:29 -0000 Subject: First potions lesson/Harry getting special treatment and Draco's view of him In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 145942 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "dumbledore11214" wrote: > What special treatment? Are you talking about PS/SS and poor > Slytherins being cheated of the House Cup? I am being a bit sarcastic > here of course. Trio just defeated Voldemort. I see no special > treatment here whatsoever. IMO of course, it was points fairly and > very deservingly awarded. And this is also IMO objectively fair win, > even if Slytherins do not think so. > Are you talking about different House Cup competition? You mean that House Cup that is awarded at the leaving feast where the banners were already in Slytherin Green and where the headmaster waited for the last possible moment to humiliate a whole house by giving the House Cup to their rivals? It is great reading but looking at it with a bit more empathy than just for Harry it was a very nasty and unfair thing to do. He could have awarded those points any time after the trio defeated LV. But he chose to do it this way. Letting the Slytherins think they had won, letting them have the banners in their house colours and then take it away from them publicely. What did they do to deserve that? Gerry From willsonkmom at msn.com Thu Jan 5 12:59:43 2006 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Thu, 05 Jan 2006 12:59:43 -0000 Subject: First potions lesson/Harry getting special treatment In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 145943 Potioncat: I'm going to slip my replies into the different comments of this post and also counter some points brought up in other parts of the thread. > Magpie wrote: > "I think the main point here that's getting lost here is that > regardless of whether Harry could have done this, the point was that > he wouldn't. I really don't think Snape was hoping Harry would have > the answer or was at all disappointed that he didn't. I think he > probably would have hated Harry all the more if Harry had answered > like Hermione." Potioncat: Harry did read over his books. He had them for about a month before school started. He and Hagrid went to Diagon Alley on July 31/Aug 1 and school started Sep 1/2. I don't think Snape expected Harry to know the answers. Would he have been angry if Harry had? I'm not sure. Maybe he would have shown the same calculating look he gave Harry at the Parseltongue incident. I've seen different comments, offering that Hermione had her books longer. Do we have canon that says the children are notified on their birthday? My take is that the letters for all the students go out in the summer before the school year starts. Harry's letters started coming before his birthday. I think the main difference in our reactions to the first Potions class is determined by our view of Snape's motivation. Let me explain better what I mean. Some readers think Snape is only a bitter man, still carrying a grudge against James Potter. His only reason for attacking Harry is that Harry is James's son; and he attacks him although ignorant of Harry's true nature. Other readers accept that Snape is a bitter man who still has a grudge against James and the Marauders, but that he is fighting Lord Voldemort and he has reasons to "test" Harry. His actions toward Harry range from unpleasant to cruel with an occasional neutral tossed in; but they are performed for a reason that have very little to do with James. But just as Slughorn thinks Harry is like Lily, gifted at potions; Snape thinks Harry is like James, a rule-breaker. Hmmm, which teacher is right? I'm not justifying Snape's methods, but rather looking at his reasons. > > Betsy HP wrote: > "Dumbledore didn't just reward Gryffindor, he punished Slytherin. It > was an odd choice, and it never sat well with me. (Personally, I > think he's trying to make up for the Norbert incident, and it does > win Harry back into Gryffindor's good graces, but at what cost?)" Potioncat: It made for a good ending, and had it just been between Harry and Draco, it might have worked. The image had punch, but it wasn't the right way for a DD to do things. It was more a Snape-type action. But I don't think we should blame DD. It was JKR's doing. I really don't think she looked at the effect as broadly as we do. The other thing is that the way the points were handled, and the known McGonagall-Snape competition for the Cup it was made to be very, very important. Then the whole thing disappears in the other books. We're told one other time that Gryffindor won the House Cup and after that, nothing. Of course, more important things were going on. But I've missed the House Cup information. > Alla wrote: > "Again, he awarded well deserved points. It may not have sit well > with Slytherin pride, but the point was made Gryffindor gets special > tretment here. To me special means undeserved, unless you argue that > Trio did not deserve those points, I don't see any special treatment > here. As to why awarding during the Feast. well, why not? They > behaved like Heroes and IMO School should honor their heroes." Potioncat: The points should have been awarded sooner. Or at the very least, before the current numbers were announced. But to announce the current numbers as if everything was finished and then change them was wrong. Again, I blame JKR, not Dumbledore. Had the points been awarded sooner, the Trio could still have been honored at the Dinner. The precedent for awarding points at the moment earned was set earlier. When they saved the school from the troll, they were given the points on the spot, not at a dinner. When Harry and Ron were given points for the Chamber (next book, I know) it was in DD's office, not at a dinner. From luckdragon64 at yahoo.ca Thu Jan 5 13:06:37 2006 From: luckdragon64 at yahoo.ca (Bee Chase) Date: Thu, 5 Jan 2006 08:06:37 -0500 (EST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] other ways to destroy Voldemort In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20060105130638.38748.qmail@web53304.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 145944 allies426 wrote: I do not believe for a second that Harry will "kill" Voldemort or even attempt an Avada Kedavra. Luckdragon: I believe the best way to Vanquish LV is to rid him of his powers and leave him as a completely magicless muggle or squib. Since Power seems to be what is most important to LV and his belief that muggles are inferior this would be a fate worse than death for him. --------------------------------- Find your next car at Yahoo! Canada Autos [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From Wink45zes at aol.com Thu Jan 5 04:46:58 2006 From: Wink45zes at aol.com (Wink45zes at aol.com) Date: Wed, 4 Jan 2006 23:46:58 EST Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Who was with Voldemort at GH? Message-ID: <293.37a4b1a.30edfec2@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 145945 Lia wrote: Still, others have raised the issue of accompaniment, and it would seem that someone else might have been there. My guess here would be either Snape or Bellatrix--because it would explain the actions and behavior of either in later events. (e.g., Snape's "re-allegiance", Bellatrix's claims of closeness to LV, and so forth). However, the introduction of RAB--whomever that may be, Regulus or otherwise--may indicate a different person altogether. Wink45: While I agree with Carol that Wormtail was at Godric's Hollow, I'm not yet saying that there could not have been someone else there as well. However I think we can rule out Regulus Black, maybe*. Harry read his name on the Black family tree the summer of 1995, and noted that his death was "some fifteen years before." That would put Regulus's death in 1980, the year Harry was born and the year before the attack at Godric's Hollow. Then there is the *maybe. Rowlling has admitted she is not good at "math," and it seems she didn't spend a lot of time with real life calendars. So it is possible that "some fifteen years before" will turn out to really mean "thirteen or fourteen years earlier." Voldemort doesn't seem to have been shy about telling his Death Eaters that he had gone further than everyone in defeating death. I wonder if perhaps after watching Sirius turn against the family during his Hogwarts years, if Mrs. Black didn't decide to send Regulus to Durmstrang instead. Do we know for sure that Regulus went to Hogwarts? At Durmstrang he might have learned about Horcruses, and figured it out from Voldemort's bragging. Just a thought. Wink45 From rdoliver30 at yahoo.com Thu Jan 5 05:14:59 2006 From: rdoliver30 at yahoo.com (lupinlore) Date: Thu, 05 Jan 2006 05:14:59 -0000 Subject: JKR is a Death Eater? (was:Re: Hobbsian worlds; Crime & Punishment) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 145946 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Caius Marcius" wrote: > Granting much of what you say, you seem to think the > narrative incongruities cannot but suggest some flaw (deep-rooted or > otherwise) in JKR. A personal flaw in her, you mean? Not at all. As I believe I said, it is human nature to be inconsistent and conflicted, even (and perhaps most especially) at the deeper levels. On the other hand, I'm not inclined to regard JKR with the awe many feel she deserves. She is a writer who, like all writers, has strengths and weaknesses. Her strengths are often very pronounced -- for instance in basic character creation or in world description. Her weaknesses are also sometimes very pronounced -- for instance her consistency and logical plotting aren't always very good, and she has a habit of getting herself into corners and then using a lot of hand-waving and deus-ex- machina constructions to get herself out. Where the balance between her strengths and weaknesses comes down will, IMO, be determined by how the Potter series as a whole comes together after Book VII. The "contradictions" you list above will endure > that generations yet unborn will go online (or whatever our clever > posterity do) to debate the "true" meaning of the Potterverse, just > as Shakespearean scholars stil come up with the most widely > contradictory theories. > Okay, that may be true. I doubt Shakespeare, or even Tolkien, has much to worry about with regard to JKR -- I think she's more in the category of L. Frank Baum or perhaps C.S. Lewis in his worse efforts. But there are flaws in Shakespeare as well, and in Tolkien and Dickens and anyone else you want to name. Nobody is perfect, nor exempt from criticism for the flaws in their work. Lupinlore From kchuplis at alltel.net Thu Jan 5 05:22:56 2006 From: kchuplis at alltel.net (kchuplis) Date: Thu, 05 Jan 2006 05:22:56 -0000 Subject: Harry and Ginny Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 145947 In re-re-reading HBP, I just noticed a paragraph that had not registered before and sheds some light on this whole argument that was going on a while ago about "where did this come from". One, we know the previous year Ginny relaxed around Harry. Then Harry spent quite a bit of time at the Burrow over a couple of summers. The summer before HBP he spent a huge amount of time there. I don't know if anyone has ever been in a situation where you are in one place with a small group of people and you do EVERYTHING with those people but it's like a super condensing of relationships. I think almost two months of playing quidditch in the fields around the Burrow and doing daily tasks etc. with just the Weasley kids was bound to up the relationship of Harry with all of them. Afterall, it isn't until they get on the train and Ginny goes to be with Dean Thomas that Harry even remembers they didn't really hang out *at school*. It seemed natural to him that they would get a compartment together. Then, in the very first potions class with Slughorn Harry smells amortentia, the "love" potion. "it reminded him simultaneously of treacle tart, the woody smell of a broomstick handle and something flowery he thought he might have smelled at the Burrow" (HBP Scholastic pg 183). But, what interested me was pg. 192 after class: " "Hang on," said a voice close by Harry's left ear and he caught a sudden waft of that flowery smell he had picked up in Slughorn's dungeon. He looked around and saw that Ginny had joined them. " He doesn't realize it on the conscious level there, but that's IMO the big trigger for his sub-concious of Ginny Is Interesting. He really only wakes up to it when he actually sees her kissing Dean Thomas, but the seeds were there for sometime. Certainly, most of the forming of it happened in a few short sentences here and there describing the halcyon days at the Burrow that summer. It isn't a romance novel so IMO that is plenty. I think it's pretty skillfully done. No one is more surprised (and rather alarmed) than Harry when he realizes he has these reactions. And what I enjoyed best of all is that Harry's reactions here seem much more adult than when he was attracted to Cho. At any rate, maybe you've all talked about this (I searched and didn't see anything but Yahoo's search function is less than ideal) and maybe some of you have seen that paragraph, but it was the first time it sunk in with me and I just found it an excellent connector in the the progression of this relationship. In fact, I've actually been aware (probalby because I am reading it after the big discussion of a couple of weeks ago) of all kinds of very small sentences here and there that are before the "purring beast" wakes, that are pretty indicative that Harry does see Ginny in a much different light than previous years. Just some meanderings. Feel free to slash and burn. :) kchuplis From kchuplis at alltel.net Thu Jan 5 04:59:12 2006 From: kchuplis at alltel.net (kchuplis) Date: Thu, 05 Jan 2006 04:59:12 -0000 Subject: "Stand aside, girl" and the End In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 145948 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "annemehr" wrote: > > > See, I think it's the combination of all three things that explains > it. 1)Wanting to get information from her if possible; thus the > "negotiation," but 2)Afraid she may have found a weakness in his > immortality or would in the near future, and 3)She had a nasty > tendency of "defying him" and escaping, so: a quick AK and down to the > business of killing Harry. > You know, I was just thinking of the scene where LV comes to ask for a teaching position from DD: "The old argument," he said softly. "But nothing I have seen in the world has supported your famous pronouncements that love is more powerful than my kind of magic, Dumbledore." (HBP Scholastic pg. 444); Well, it is clear from this statement that Tom and DD had often had scholarly arguments of some kind over this. Despite DD's claim and even LV in GoF that he forgot it or discounted it, it is clear that it must have come up either frequently or at least vehemently enough to spur that statement to DD. What if for a moment at GH, LV wavered in his belief that DD was wrong. Afterall, he respected DD's power if not DD himself ,as is clear in his behaviour toward him and the many references of DD being the only wizard he feared (or at least was wary of). So, though he may have not believed it, or may not have wanted to believe it, he may have sensed such fierce love in Lily for Harry that for a moment he was trying to avoid the very thing that happened, which was the protection her sacrifice offered Harry. But, instead, he only fortified the protection by giving her the choice, just as he caused his own prophecy to come true in marking Harry. In some ways, it was just more of the inevitability of the prophecy coming true. He hesitates (thinking of the old arguement) but sensing growing conviction in Lily realizes he must act. Only it's too late. Once the choice was offered the "old magic" had begun. I can imagine a moment for LV that I relate to whenever I start to do something that in my head I know "that was a mistake" but everything is in motion and I can't stop it. It's then like watching yourself in slow motion heading in a direction that you don't have the power to stop but you KNOW you just made a huge mistake. I've had this happen more than once to me when I've burned myself on cookware and sometimes in working on the computer. A dreadful feeling, and something LV would never cop to once he is "back". It's a thought anyway. kchuplis From rdsilverstein at yahoo.com Thu Jan 5 05:33:09 2006 From: rdsilverstein at yahoo.com (hpfan_mom) Date: Thu, 05 Jan 2006 05:33:09 -0000 Subject: Fulfilling the prophecy (Was: "Stand aside, girl" and the End) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 145949 > Annemehr wrote: If Lily studied in the Veil Room, she'd potentially have even more valuable information in LV's eyes than just the scoop on DD -- but, you are right, she might also be much more dangerous to play around with. Why? Because if she defied him and escaped him a fourth time, she may have had time to figure out about the Horcruxes. hpfan_mom: If Lily had "stood aside" and escaped Voldemort, she wouldn't have defied him. Instead, by standing her ground and protecting Harry, she *did* defy him, just as James did minutes earlier. As we know, LV couldn't be sure whether Harry or Neville was the boy referenced by the prophecy. Perhaps, by refusing to hand over their son and protecting him to the end, the Potters fulfilled part of the prophecy by defying Voldemort a third time. Which begs the question, how did they defy him the two previous times? Joining the Order? There's so much for Book 7 . . . hpfan_mom From lebeto033 at yahoo.com Thu Jan 5 05:58:17 2006 From: lebeto033 at yahoo.com (lebeto033) Date: Thu, 05 Jan 2006 05:58:17 -0000 Subject: First potions lesson/Harry getting special treatment In-Reply-To: <43BCAB73.6010301@telus.net> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 145950 KJ writes: > To me, it was in very poor taste to allow the Slytherin colours to be > displayed as the winners prior to the giving of the extra points. > Yes, the Trio and Neville deserved the points. I don't think anyone > has an argument with that. I do not understand why it was necessary > for Dumbledore to make the point that he did, by literally stripping > away Slytherin's win and giving it to the Gryffs in that manner. lebeto: Now I might be absolutely wrong here and if so please feel free to correct me. I thought that the colors presented in the Great Hall are those of the previous winner which for the past seven years or so has been the Slyths. I saw it more as a changing of the guard from last year's winner to this year's winner. It was a little rude to leave the awarding of the points until the last minute but I thought this was JKR making it more dramatic than Harry seeing they won and being told that the Trio plus Neville were awarded some points. Of course this is all my own opinion. From rdoliver30 at yahoo.com Thu Jan 5 05:52:26 2006 From: rdoliver30 at yahoo.com (lupinlore) Date: Thu, 05 Jan 2006 05:52:26 -0000 Subject: First potions lesson/Harry getting special treatment and Draco's view of him In-Reply-To: <43BCFE7D.3921.4D6C5F@localhost> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 145951 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Shaun Hately" wrote: > > The discussion of why Dumbledore did what he did really only comes up > at the end of Order of the Phoenix. Until that time, he hasn't > explained everything to Harry - so the fact this desire that Harry > not grow up arrogant hasn't been mentioned since early in > Philosopher's Stone, doesn't strike me as at all surprising or > telling. > I'm going to have to go with Alla on this one. Given the lack of mention of that issue since PS/SS, combined with the sudden change of tone we find between OOTP and HBP, I think JKR pretty much WAS backpedalling from that issue (among others) just as fast as she could. She had made a critical mistake with regard to Harry and Dumbledore, in effect putting her "epitome of goodness" in the role of someone who condoned and approved of child abuse -- or who at least tolerated it as conducive to some kind of "greater good." Once again, this strikes me as an example of JKR not thinking things through very clearly sometimes, and sometimes being very naive about the messages she is sending. JKR was trying an emergency tar-baby- ectomy in the third chapter of HBP, trying to separate DD from the Dursleys in a radical way. She succeeded only partially of course -- she'd put her foot in it too deep to draw it out unstained. But I think the effort is very clear. Lupinlore From sherriola at earthlink.net Thu Jan 5 13:53:31 2006 From: sherriola at earthlink.net (Sherry Gomes) Date: Thu, 5 Jan 2006 05:53:31 -0800 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: First potions lesson/Harry getting special treatment In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <005501c611ff$6af60ac0$0400a8c0@pensive> No: HPFGUIDX 145952 Potioncat: I think the main difference in our reactions to the first Potions class is determined by our view of Snape's motivation. Let me explain better what I mean. Some readers think Snape is only a bitter man, still carrying a grudge against James Potter. His only reason for attacking Harry is that Harry is James's son; and he attacks him although ignorant of Harry's true nature. Other readers accept that Snape is a bitter man who still has a grudge against James and the Marauders, but that he is fighting Lord Voldemort and he has reasons to "test" Harry. His actions toward Harry range from unpleasant to cruel with an occasional neutral tossed in; but they are performed for a reason that have very little to do with James. Sherry now: Are we viewing this incident now from the point of view of having read five more books since SS/PS? After all, in that very first lesson, we didn't know about James and Snape. we didn't know Snape hated Harry's father. we didn't have the never ending good/bad Snape debate yet. Did anyone read this first potions lesson the very first time and think, yeah, he's just being a tough teacher, impressing on the class how Harry is nothing special, keeping up his death eater role or anything else? My initial reaction was to be horrified that a teacher would so unfairly single out a first time student in such a way and humiliate him. in fact, it makes me cringe, every time I read it. That has nothing to do with what i think of Snape now, but like Harry, it set me off against him from the beginning. And the entire lesson goes on the same. Even though I never thought Snape was the one after the stone in that book, I still understood why the trio might think so. Sherry From xmezumiiru at yahoo.com Thu Jan 5 14:10:59 2006 From: xmezumiiru at yahoo.com (An'nai Jiriki) Date: Thu, 5 Jan 2006 06:10:59 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: First potions lesson/Harry getting special treatment In-Reply-To: <43BCAB73.6010301@telus.net> Message-ID: <20060105141059.11728.qmail@web31703.mail.mud.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 145953 --- Kathryn Jones wrote: > > Betsy HP wrote: > > "Dumbledore didn't just reward Gryffindor, he > punished Slytherin. It > > was an odd choice, and it never sat well with me. > > Alla wrote: > > "It may > not have sit well > > with Slytherin pride, but the point was made > Gryffindor gets special > > tretment here. To me special means undeserved, > unless you argue that > > Trio did not deserve those points, I don't see any > special treatment > > here. As to why awarding during the Feast. well, > why not? They > > behaved like Heroes and IMO School should honor > their heroes." > > KJ writes: > > I particularly like the first line of this post. > To me, it was in > very poor taste to allow the Slytherin colours to be > displayed as the > winners prior to the giving of the extra points. > Yes, the Trio and > Neville deserved the points. I don't think anyone > has an argument with > that. Chris: I do. It was extremely unfair. DD awarded points and knowingly admitted that the trio were out of bounds and breaking the rules. This would send a terrible message to the other houses that they could break the rules. First the cloak, although technically legal in Hogwarts, was in bad taste. DD told Harry after the mirror incident that he should not be wandering out during off hours (I don't have the book in front of me). Any other student would have been punished (like Draco later in the book) and any other teacher would have done the punishing. Second, Filch, Snape and Quirell ran to the library to find the student out of bed and I received the impression that it was extremely urgent, more urgent then the loyalties of Quirell. (I may be mixing up the movie here). Third, we don't know if Hagrid told DD that the trio knew of Fluffy or that they knew how to pass him. We also do not know if Hagrid told DD that an unknown person knew of how to pass Fluffy. If Hagrid kept this to himself, he was extremely irresponsible. If he did tell DD any of it, DD then allowed the events to take place by not changing the traps. These things are known as negligence in our world and are prosicutable the same as the crime that was committed. Finally, the trio snuck out after hours. Previously, that earned a dentention and -50 house points each. They used magic on another student, previously anywhere from no punishment to a weeks detention and many house points lost. Finally, they used magic in the halls, which is specifically forbidden, but rarely punished. The trio did not defeat LV, and neither did Harry, he just expelled a demon. Also, the reasons DD gave for awarding the points was pathetic: 'Cool use of intellect', 'the best game of chess Hogwarts has ever seen', 'Pure Love'. I question I ask is who saw all these to know? Personally, Ravenclaw should have been up in arms over the intellect points, any chess player and the chess club should have been up in arms over the chess points and the whole school should have regected the pure love points. I saw awarding Harry the points for pure love as a telling the rest of the school they are not worthy of that kind of love. The only points I think that were deserved was Neville's, but even then, why should he be rewarded for doing what is right unless everyone is awarded the same. >I do not understand why it was necessary for > Dumbledore to make > the point that he did, by literally stripping away > Slytherin's win and > giving it to the Gryffs in that manner. In point of > fact, I don't know > what point he was making. I don't think that > Dumbledore did things > thoughtlessly, or without reasons of his own. I also > don't think that it > was meant to be a foolish preference for Gryffindor > House. There is no > doubt that the way that this was done clearly > demonstrated preferential > treatment. There is a fanfic out there that deals with Snape's view of this matter (and it sucks that I lost it too). Basically, Snape laments that he had been working to wean the Sliths away from their parents dark pasts slowly over 7 years. In that one move, DD practically handed all 7 years of Sliths over to LV on a silver platter, and I think with the story being handed down several more generations were lost. He basically told DD that by favoring Harry, DD was creating LV's army. How could Sliths expect to be treated with anything as good as indifference after that stunt. DD told almost 100 Sliths and about 200 others that no matter how good they are or how hard they work, all it take is one moment of stupidity that their personalities are not wired for to be loved and win all the glory. He all but says that standing up for what is right is good, but not nearly as good as breaking the rules and putting lives in danger aka "It's ok as long as the world is saved". LV's world in which Sliths are in charge and see as respectable, if only from themselves, looks awefully good. A perfect correlation today is the Suni/Shi'ite struggle in Iraq (don't trust American news, go to any French or German news for what is really happening over there). For years the Suni's have repressed the Shi'ites. Now, the Shi'ites are doing all they can to make sure the Suni's do not have a place in government. Reports even show that whole Suni towns are disappearing because a political leader is emerging. I see the Slith/Griff struggle with the Shi'ites as Griffs. I really think, now with DD out of the way, Harry's going to slam headfirst into the real world and find out that LV's world is just the same as the world now. I also think that people will stop treating Harry as the pampered prince and he's going to resent that, vocally. I would love to see an ending to the books where LV wins the war by toppling the status quo, even if he loses the battle by getting himself and his death eaters killed. Chris "You irritate me. Kill me now." ~Javert, Les Miserables __________________________________________ Yahoo! DSL Something to write home about. Just $16.99/mo. or less. dsl.yahoo.com From Aisbelmon at hotmail.com Thu Jan 5 14:37:52 2006 From: Aisbelmon at hotmail.com (M.Clifford) Date: Thu, 05 Jan 2006 14:37:52 -0000 Subject: First potions lesson/Harry getting special treatment In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 145954 > > Magpie wrote: > > "I think the main point here that's getting lost here is that > > regardless of whether Harry could have done this, the point was > > that he wouldn't. > > Potioncat: > Harry did read over his books. He had them for about a month before > school started. He and Hagrid went to Diagon Alley on July 31/Aug 1 > and school started Sep 1/2. I don't think Snape expected Harry to > know the answers. Would he have been angry if Harry had? I'm not > sure. Maybe he would have shown the same calculating look he gave > Harry at the Parseltongue incident. > > I've seen different comments, offering that Hermione had her books > longer. Do we have canon that says the children are notified on > their birthday? Valky: It can be assumed, I think, but I don't fully recall it being specifically confirmed but for a vague memory of an interview comment JKR made on the subject. OTOH we do have some canon that proves Hermione's interest in the Wizard World was given freer reign for longer than Harry. For instance, she has enjoyed the privilege of knowing more about Harry than he knows himself, having read about him in three books before she met him. Hermione's parents were/are simply far more supportive of her magicalness than the Dursleys ever would be of Harry and that is plain undisputable canon which clearly gives Hermione an advantage over Harry in regards to knowledge of Wizard things. Potioncat: > Some readers think Snape is only a bitter man, > still carrying a grudge against James Potter. His only reason for > attacking Harry is that Harry is James's son; and he attacks him > although ignorant of Harry's true nature. > > Other readers accept that Snape is a bitter man who still has a > grudge against James and the Marauders, but that he is fighting Lord > Voldemort and he has reasons to "test" Harry. His actions toward > Harry range from unpleasant to cruel with an occasional neutral > tossed in; but they are performed for a reason that have very little > to do with James. Valky: In many respects I agree with this conclusion. It all goes directly to the enigma of Snape and we clearly have different views amongst us on that. :) I do, however want to lodge my validation of what some here are saying about this first potions lesson. It seems perfectly logical to me to read Snape's actions here as intending some shrewd test of Harry's abilities and knowledge, served with a dash of undercutting the celebrity stigma that follows Harry around right out of his classroom without further ado, and a hint of addressing the whole class with his high standards. Letting some of his bitter feelings loose on Harry in the process was clearly a tasty icing on what otherwise could be (and I think probably is) an objective slice of reality cake. It is so logical an assumption, IMO, because it is almost precisely what we are given by JKR in offpage comments about Snape that: a. Dumbledore (the epitome of goodness) believes in learning about and dealing with people like Snape. and b. Snape abuses his power, and is a nasty man. These comments 100% support a view that Snape's first potions class was Snape abusing a position of authority for his own sadistic pleasure, but underlying that, there was some discernable good in it, whether it be in helping Harry to develop humility in a world that can't get enough of his famous story, or in giving him a heads up on what some think he might become, or whatever you like, (but I do think those two are realistic options), I think the point of JKR's comment about Dumbledore believing everyone should deal with the Snape's of the world is that there was a perspective worth seeing in Snape, even if we shouldn't overall think he's 'too nice'. Valky From willsonkmom at msn.com Thu Jan 5 14:51:12 2006 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Thu, 05 Jan 2006 14:51:12 -0000 Subject: First potions lesson/Harry getting special treatment In-Reply-To: <005501c611ff$6af60ac0$0400a8c0@pensive> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 145955 > Sherry now: > > Are we viewing this incident now from the point of view of having read five > more books since SS/PS? Potioncat: Not only having read all the books, and read them more than once, but also years of discussing it. Most of us have dormant movie contamination and very active cases of HPfGU contamination. None of us are pure anymore. Sherry: After all, in that very first lesson, we didn't > know about James and Snape. we didn't know Snape hated Harry's father. we > didn't have the never ending good/bad Snape debate yet. Did anyone read > this first potions lesson the very first time and think, yeah, he's just > being a tough teacher, impressing on the class how Harry is nothing special, > keeping up his death eater role or anything else? Potioncat: After identifying the stock "mean foster family who treat the orphan like dirt" that the Hero has escaped, I thought he was the follow on stock "very mean teacher who makes the young Hero's life Hell." I gave him very little thought at all. (Hard to believe now, I know.) It wasn't until someone slipped out the information that Snape wasn't the bad guy that I started to look at him differently. That and Quirrell telling us that Snape let teachers think he wanted to throw the Quidditch game he was reffing when really he was protecting Harry. We have canon that Snape does things for reasons that aren't what they seem. Sherry: Even though I never > thought Snape was the one after the stone in that book, I still understood > why the trio might think so. Potioncat: Oh, of course, the kids had very good reasons for thinking he was the bad guy. It was a nice set up. From newbrigid at yahoo.com Thu Jan 5 14:44:08 2006 From: newbrigid at yahoo.com (Lia) Date: Thu, 5 Jan 2006 06:44:08 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Veela characteristics (RE: comic relief for book 7) and Fleur--More than Meets the Eye In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20060105144408.25532.qmail@web31711.mail.mud.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 145956 Allie wrote: Fleur is only part Veela, but do you think she might have any of those abilities in her somewhere, or that it would be significant? Corey wrote: Don't see why she wouldn't; besides it gives her one more way to fight the DEs if need be...if she got mad at someone that might come out in her as well. Antosha wrote: It has occured to me that the "one shining day" is a highly likely time and place for a DE attack, and the idea of "Phlegm"--who did such a rotten job in the Triwizard Tournement, and whom the Weasley women resented so in HBP--were to turn into an avenging Fury defending her husband, in book seven. Lia repllies: I have always thought that there might be more to Fleur than meets the eye. First of all, there is her Veela heritage, which, as Allie, Corey, and Antosha have mentioned, links directly to this concept; she may be stunningly lovely outside, yet fierce and frightening inside. (Note: I sincerely do NOT think that she's "ugly" or "evil" on the inside, however.) Next, and regardless of what the Trio, Ginny, Mrs. Weasley (initially) think, certain aspects of Fleur's character, and her actions, point to greater depth as well. Fleur would not have become a TriWizard Champion if she'd been all beauty and no brains (so to speak); surely the Goblet, an impartial judge (albeit one who was hoodwinked, but that's another matter) recognized that she possessed intelligence, resourcefulness, and courage to boot. True, she didn't fare as well as the others, but she became a Champion in the first place. Also, something that particularly impressed me about Fleur was the way she handled Bill in HBP. Though she does, at first, seem to place importance on appearances (especially her own), she is outraged at the suggestion that she would abandon Bill. Clearly, Fleur is more serious than everyone supposed. (I also don't think that Bill, who also is more than just a good-looking "rock star" type, would be with Fleur in the first place if she didn't have more character.) I've noticed that many characters in the Potterverse are more (and sometimes less) than they seem. I think that Fleur definitely fits into this category...and, thankfully, in a good way. --------------------------------- Yahoo! DSL Something to write home about. Just $16.99/mo. or less [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From Nrsedany2be at aol.com Thu Jan 5 15:08:31 2006 From: Nrsedany2be at aol.com (Nrsedany2be at aol.com) Date: Thu, 5 Jan 2006 10:08:31 EST Subject: [HPforGrownups] Harry and Ginny Message-ID: <26e.3a54d84.30ee906f@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 145957 I'm not sure if I caught that example after class about the smell when Ginny comes up, but I noticed right off the bat when they got on the train that Harry was feeling out of sorts when Ginny left him to go be with Dean. Of course I'm a sucker for big brother's friend falls for little sister sort of thing. But the train scene is what really hit me that yeah cool Harry likes Ginny in more than a friend or hey that's my friend's little sister. I also love the scenes where he's getting jealous of Dean. Those were funny. I think that if there is no school at Hogwarts book 7, then Ginny's comming with them. I think Ginny has enough tact not to argue with Harry at DD funeral. But if she can she will come, because she doesn't want to be left out and in her mind she would be safer with Harry then away from Harry. But that of course depends on mama Weasley too. Danielle [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From foxmoth at qnet.com Thu Jan 5 15:11:52 2006 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Thu, 05 Jan 2006 15:11:52 -0000 Subject: last minute points was Re: First potions lesson/Harry getting special treatment In-Reply-To: <43BCAB73.6010301@telus.net> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 145958 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Kathryn Jones wrote: > > > > Betsy HP wrote: > > "Dumbledore didn't just reward Gryffindor, he punished Slytherin. It > > was an odd choice, and it never sat well with me. (Personally, I > > think he's trying to make up for the Norbert incident, and it does > > win Harry back into Gryffindor's good graces, but at what cost?)" > > Alla wrote: > > "Again, he awarded well deserved points. It may not have sit well > > with Slytherin pride, but the point was made Gryffindor gets special > > tretment here. To me special means undeserved, unless you argue that > > Trio did not deserve those points, I don't see any special treatment > > here. As to why awarding during the Feast. well, why not? They > > behaved like Heroes and IMO School should honor their heroes." > > KJ writes: > > I particularly like the first line of this post. To me, it was in > very poor taste to allow the Slytherin colours to be displayed as the > winners prior to the giving of the extra points. Yes, the Trio and > Neville deserved the points. I don't think anyone has an argument with > that. I do not understand why it was necessary for Dumbledore to make > the point that he did, by literally stripping away Slytherin's win and > giving it to the Gryffs in that manner. In point of fact, I don't know > what point he was making. I don't think that Dumbledore did things > thoughtlessly, or without reasons of his own. I also don't think that it > was meant to be a foolish preference for Gryffindor House. There is no > doubt that the way that this was done clearly demonstrated preferential > treatment. > Pippin: Harry is kept in the hospital wing, away from everybody, and arrives at the feast just before Dumbledore starts to speak. There is no murmur of astonishment when Dumbledore announces that last minute points will be awarded. There is nothing to show that this is not a fine old Hogwarts tradition, very much in keeping with the wizards' love of drama, except for Ron's statement a few days before that the points are all in and Slytherin has won. But Ron has never read _Hogwarts, A History_ and doesn't pick up everything from his wizard family -- he didn't know about the Sorting Hat, or the legend of the Chamber of Secrets, or even that Slytherin was noted for his pureblood beliefs. Hermione might not want to mention it if she didn't want to raise false hopes. We never "see" the House Cup awarded again, so we don't have anything to use for comparison. Only Draco is shown as being shocked that Slytherin lost. So I don't think this upset was a deliberate insult to Slytherin House, which may well have achieved some last minute victories of its own in the past, but just the usual melodramatic wizards' way of doing things. They can't get together without showing off, is the way Arthur put it, IIRC. I also like Finwitch's idea that the banners hanging at the start of the feast are last year's winners. That seems very appropriate. Pippin From Aisbelmon at hotmail.com Thu Jan 5 15:30:33 2006 From: Aisbelmon at hotmail.com (M.Clifford) Date: Thu, 05 Jan 2006 15:30:33 -0000 Subject: House Cup Points WAs Re: First potions lesson/Harry getting special treatment In-Reply-To: <20060105141059.11728.qmail@web31703.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 145959 > Chris: > I do. It was extremely unfair. DD awarded points and > knowingly admitted that the trio were out of bounds > and breaking the rules. This would send a terrible > message to the other houses that they could break the > rules. Valky: Wooh, Chris, you make a strong argument here, it's very impressive. I have a few remarks to make in response though. To the above, I have to agree, the trio were out of bed against the rules of the school, but I disagree that it is such a terrible message to the other students. After all the conditions of getting these points for rule breaking were that the rulebreakers also take on a set of seven deadly protections set by fully fledged adult wizards and then confront the most evil and dangerous wizard known to the world to top it off. Not everyone is going to see any value in this trade off are they. > Chris: > First the cloak, although technically legal in > Hogwarts, was in bad taste. Valky: I don't think Dumbledore really had a choice in this matter. The Cloak belonged to Harry as inheritance from his father, it wouldn't have been right to keep it. Additionally, Dumbledore knew that Harry was in danger from the moment he set foot out of his Aunt's home, not all kids live in that much danger day to day either, and the cloak can protect Harry. It's fair and right to give Harry his own possession especially if denying it from him could mean denying him protection that he most sincerely needs. Chris: > DD told Harry after the > mirror incident that he should not be wandering out > during off hours (I don't have the book in front of > me). Any other student would have been punished (like > Draco later in the book) and any other teacher would > have done the punishing. Valky: Any other teacher would, yes. But would Dumbledore to any other student? In COS we clearly see Tom Riddle spoken to kindly and sent to bed by Dumbledore when he is out of bounds. And lets not forget Dumbledore's merciful attitude to Draco standing over him with a wand pointed at his heart. I don't think DD was being unfair by going easy on Harry, he was just being himself. > Chris: > Second, Filch, Snape and Quirell ran to the library to > find the student out of bed and I received the > impression that it was extremely urgent, more urgent > then the loyalties of Quirell. (I may be mixing up the > movie here). Valky: Yep, you are. The conversation with Quirrel takes place in the forest in the book. > Chris: > Third, we don't know if Hagrid told DD that the trio > knew of Fluffy or that they knew how to pass him. We > also do not know if Hagrid told DD that an unknown > person knew of how to pass Fluffy. If Hagrid kept > this to himself, he was extremely irresponsible. If he > did tell DD any of it, DD then allowed the events to > take place by not changing the traps. These things > are known as negligence in our world and are > prosicutable the same as the crime that was committed. Valky: A well made point. I doubt Hagrid did tell anyone of his slips of the tongue, and that was clearly irresponsible of him. But then the twist in the story is that Dumbledore knew Voldemorts will, he wouldn't have blamed Hagrid and really couldn't have. I don't think Dumbledore was underestimating Voldemort by leaving the responsibility in the hands of Hagrid, he took the ultimate responsibility on himself because his protection was the mirror. Chris: > The trio did not defeat LV, and neither did Harry, he > just expelled a demon. Also, the reasons DD gave for > awarding the points was pathetic: 'Cool use of > intellect', 'the best game of chess Hogwarts has ever > seen', 'Pure Love'. I question I ask is who saw all > these to know? Valky: Good question. My guess is that Hogwarts saw it and Dumbledore read the signs or asked the silent observers (portraits, ghosts etc) By the way, it was "pure nerve and outstanding courage." not pure love. > > Personally, Ravenclaw should have been up in arms over > the intellect points, any chess player and the chess > club should have been up in arms over the chess points > and the whole school should have regected the pure > love points. I saw awarding Harry the points for pure > love as a telling the rest of the school they are not > worthy of that kind of love. Valky: I think the reason that the other houses weren't up in arms about it was that thet were already up in arms about Slytherin winning *again*. Chris: > There is a fanfic out there that deals with Snape's > view of this matter (and it sucks that I lost it too). > Basically, Snape laments that he had been working to > wean the Sliths away from their parents dark pasts > slowly over 7 years. In that one move, DD practically > handed all 7 years of Sliths over to LV on a silver > platter, and I think with the story being handed down > several more generations were lost. He basically told > DD that by favoring Harry, DD was creating LV's army. Valky: Oh, this is going to get rotten tomatoes I am sure, but I think that fanfic writer has entirely missed the point. The Slytherin house was already well on their way to becoming something less that they should be in PS/SS and Snape was definitely *not* helping them realise their positive potential. He was handing out and taking away house points all year under his own set of nepotistic rules, which clearly delineates him from being their most ardent moral adviser. > Chris: > How could Sliths expect to be treated with anything as > good as indifference after that stunt. DD told almost > 100 Sliths and about 200 others that no matter how > good they are or how hard they work, Valky: The Slytherins didn't work hard for their win that year though, so how could this at all apply to them? Chris: > He all but says that standing up for what is right is > good, but not nearly as good as breaking the rules and > putting lives in danger aka "It's ok as long as the > world is saved". Valky: Din' you agree with that? :) The trio put their own lives in danger, a totally self sacrificing act, and they did it to save others. The way I see it DD is saying there is standing up for what is right, and then there is *standing up for what is right!*. > Chris: > LV's world in which Sliths are in charge and see as > respectable, if only from themselves, looks awefully > good. Valky: Does it? You know the Slytherin code is to be resourceful and cunning for your chosen ends. By that code *anything* is respectable as long as it gets you what you want. This a large part of how they won the house cup that year, they did anything and everything within their power for extra points, no holds barred on rule-breaking, scheming or hurting others, as long as you kept your sights on the goal of getting points and making others lose them. Now before the smelly fruit gets hurled, I do believe in the good Slytherin, I do I do :). But I can't say I agree with the notion that a world run on the Slytherin principles would be better than Dumbeldore's way. Valky *shivers* From foxmoth at qnet.com Thu Jan 5 15:44:06 2006 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Thu, 05 Jan 2006 15:44:06 -0000 Subject: JKR is a Death Eater? (was:Re: Hobbsian worlds; Crime & Punishment) In-Reply-To: <159.5f068f0e.30ee1ac4@aol.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 145960 > Lupinlore wrote: > > I'll have to say that if JKR really wanted to show us a > classical "liberal" scenario, she missed a golden opportunity > with Voldy's backstory. Do we find great moral struggles, human > emotion, and sympathetic portrayal in the Fall of Tom Riddle? Pippin: Nope. We'll find them in the Fall of ESE!Lupin and the Rise of DDM!Snape. Stay tuned. La Gatta Lucianese: (145916) As I mentioned in a post somewhile back, it is coming to be a more or less accepted theory that psychopathic personalities are born, not made. Nurture may determine the way psychopathy expresses itself (does the child turn into a serial killer or the corporate boss from hell?), but the personality itself seems to be inborn, and can appear fully formed in very young children. See Dr. Robert Hare on the subject. Pippin: You mean, that had young Riddle been rewarded for keeping his sadistic and paranoid impulses under control, and for using his magic in socially acceptable ways, he might have grown up to be a powerful, ruthless and manipulative leader who puts enormous emotional demands on his underlings (who are bonded partly by their sympathy for one another in having to put up with Him), who seems incapable of normal attachment but does reward and value loyalty? Who recognizes love as a Squib might recognize magic, as an enormously powerful force which is forever locked away but which others can use to great advantage? I think we've met someone like him. Elderly chap, big silver beard, pointy hat. Epitome of goodness, you might say . Of course if Dumbledore lacks empathy, we must ask what motivates him to do good for others? Well, the one thing Dumbledore seems paranoid about is dementors, who breed wherever fear and misery dwell. So Dumbledore could devote himself to bringing more love into the world, even though he can't feel it himself, because even though he can't feel it, it still protects him from the thing he fears most. Pippin who realizes this sounds weird but thinks it might be an interesting way to look at DD From ceridwennight at hotmail.com Thu Jan 5 15:47:29 2006 From: ceridwennight at hotmail.com (Ceridwen) Date: Thu, 05 Jan 2006 15:47:29 -0000 Subject: First potions lesson/Harry getting special treatment In-Reply-To: <005501c611ff$6af60ac0$0400a8c0@pensive> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 145961 Sherry: > Are we viewing this incident now from the point of view of having read five > more books since SS/PS? After all, in that very first lesson, we didn't > know about James and Snape. we didn't know Snape hated Harry's father. we > didn't have the never ending good/bad Snape debate yet. Did anyone read > this first potions lesson the very first time and think, yeah, he's just > being a tough teacher, impressing on the class how Harry is nothing special, > keeping up his death eater role or anything else? Ceridwen: My initial reaction was that Harry was concentrating on what he was doing (taking notes) and possibly lagging a bit (the mouth is faster than the quill) that he didn't notice the teacher had turned his attention to him, and so the teacher came down hard. Harry had already had an unpleasant reaction with his scar that he thought was because of that teacher, so I understood his displeasure. And I've had teachers who prefer you to watch them when they speak, so the teacher's reaction didn't surprise me a bit. It was only when the text validated Harry's anger and feeling put-upon that I was surprised. Sherry: *(snip)* > Even though I never > thought Snape was the one after the stone in that book, I still understood > why the trio might think so. Ceridwen: I enjoyed the mystery and the chase for what it was worth. I had my doubts that the person initially fingered as the culprit would end up actually being the thief. But, some writers do like to toss double red herrings, so I didn't discount the possibility. I was reading PS/SS aloud to my youngest, and purposely kept my private opinions to myself so she could think it through on her own and enjoy it better. I was also hoping that a good story like HP&theSS would get her interested in reading, since she was pretty lackadaisical about it. I'm happy to report that she did get interested, and has been reading HP and other books, since. Ceridwen. From newbrigid at yahoo.com Thu Jan 5 15:28:41 2006 From: newbrigid at yahoo.com (Lia) Date: Thu, 5 Jan 2006 07:28:41 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: CHAPDISC: HBP7, The Slug Club--Theo Nott In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20060105152841.95497.qmail@web31710.mail.mud.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 145962 justcarol67 wrote: ...he also needs someone who can talk about Theo Nott, who rather oddly isn't present in what the narrator refers to as the sixth-year Slytherin compartment. Neither, of course, is Pansy Parkinson's "gang of Slytherin girls." Maybe they're all falling over Theo in some other compartment, though I rather doubt it. (Theo was my candidate for Good Slytherin and I'm still hoping we'll see more of him. I just hope he doesn't drop out of Hogwarts to join Draco and share his "glory.") Lia muses: Funny you should mention that about Theo Nott (among all the other fine points you made). He was/is my "Good Slytherin" candidate too, for his last name seemed to be a clue, and he keeps getting mentioned here and there. Perhaps he wasn't present in the compartment because he doesn't generally enjoy the company of other Slytherins, because he's "nott" actually "one of them". Of course, so many of the "good" have flaws themselves that it makes one wonder what a "good" Slytherin would be like. As I said in another post, one thing I keep noticing is not only that characters merely develop and/or change, but that there's more to them than meets the eye, even when they seem "fleshed out"; in other words, they can be surprising. (Wouldn't it be weird, for instance, if Draco turned out to be the Good Slytherin? I'm thinking of the vulnerability he displayed to Myrtle...based on fear, perhaps, but also stemming from something else? Whoa, I may be stretching now, here...) From coverton at netscape.com Thu Jan 5 15:45:11 2006 From: coverton at netscape.com (Corey Overton) Date: Thu, 5 Jan 2006 09:45:11 -0600 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Veela characteristics (RE: comic relief for book 7) and Fleur--More than Meets the Eye In-Reply-To: <20060105144408.25532.qmail@web31711.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <000001c6120f$072013f0$6890aaac@Overton> No: HPFGUIDX 145963 Lia wrote: > Next, and regardless of what the Trio, Ginny, Mrs. Weasley > (initially) think, certain aspects of Fleur's character, and her > actions, point to greater depth as well. > > Also, something that particularly impressed me about Fleur was the > way she handled Bill in HBP. Though she does, at first, seem to > place importance on appearances (especially her own), she is > outraged at the suggestion that she would abandon Bill. Clearly, > Fleur is more serious than everyone supposed. > > I've noticed that many characters in the Potterverse are more (and > sometimes less) than they seem. I think that Fleur definitely fits > into this category...and, thankfully, in a good way. Corey here, I agree with every one on this topic except the post that says the DEs will ruin the day. I don't JKR will allow that to happen. The reason being it will be the last moment of peace before every thing will happen. And if the DEs do decide to ruin this peaceful moment, the people will be prepared for it I believe. Despite Molly's resentment toward Fleur in the start of HBP I think chapter 29 illustrates that what ever Molly and Ginny might have felt at the start of the book, they've grown to take Fleur for who she is. Your fellow list member, Corey From annemehr at yahoo.com Thu Jan 5 16:00:31 2006 From: annemehr at yahoo.com (annemehr) Date: Thu, 05 Jan 2006 16:00:31 -0000 Subject: Breaking rules/House points Was:Re: First potions lesson/Harry getting special t In-Reply-To: <20060105141059.11728.qmail@web31703.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 145964 > > KJ writes: > > Yes, the Trio and > > Neville deserved the points. I don't think anyone > > has an argument with > > that. > > Chris: > I do. It was extremely unfair. DD awarded points and > knowingly admitted that the trio were out of bounds > and breaking the rules. This would send a terrible > message to the other houses that they could break the > rules. Annemehr: First of all, I have no quibble at all with people who are unhappy with the *way* the final points were awarded. I'm only replying to Chris's points about whether they were earned at all. So, to Chris's first point. Actually, I think that was very deliberately part of the intended message: that, given a similar (apparent) emergency, the other students *can* break the rules. Of course, you are quite right that it is perfectly possible to argue with that. Chris: > First the cloak, although technically legal in > Hogwarts, was in bad taste. DD told Harry after the > mirror incident that he should not be wandering out > during off hours (I don't have the book in front of > me). Any other student would have been punished (like > Draco later in the book) and any other teacher would > have done the punishing. Annemehr: Actually, he only told Harry not to look for the mirror again -- but that if he ever did run across it again, he'd be prepared. Then he told Harry to put "that admirable cloak" back on and go to bed. There's no hint in that passage of DD saying that Harry ought not to have used the cloak to find the mirror at night. In fact, in the note pinned to it when it was a Christmas gift, DD had written "use it well." Chris: > Second, Filch, Snape and Quirell ran to the library to > find the student out of bed and I received the > impression that it was extremely urgent, more urgent > then the loyalties of Quirell. (I may be mixing up the > movie here). Annemehr: Hard to say if it was urgent -- they both do love to catch students in violations and punish them (for one Snape example, see him blasting rosebushes during the Yule Ball). It was only Filch and Snape (both of the overheard conversations with Quirrell acutally happened in the daytime), but apparently Snape had told Filch to inform him if he caught anyone wandering the corridors at night. Harry thinks Filch and Snape must be five floors above the kitchens at this point, so it's possible, if Harry miscounted, that they are on the third floor where the forbidden corridor is (remembering that in Britain, the first floor is one storey above the ground floor, which is where the Entrance Hall is, and the kitchens are on the floor below the ground floor) -- but it's more likely they're on the fourth floor. Chris: > Third, we don't know if Hagrid told DD that the trio > knew of Fluffy or that they knew how to pass him. We > also do not know if Hagrid told DD that an unknown > person knew of how to pass Fluffy. If Hagrid kept > this to himself, he was extremely irresponsible. If he > did tell DD any of it, DD then allowed the events to > take place by not changing the traps. These things > are known as negligence in our world and are > prosicutable the same as the crime that was committed. Annemehr: Given that the "traps" were apparently quite passable by a fully qualified wizard with any sense (or, alternatively, three first year students), there has been what I think is sound speculation that the first six of them were there to slow one down and most likely to be an alarm for DD that someone was passing them ("No sooner had I reached London than *it became clear to me* that the place I should be was the one I had just left"). If that is true, then the fact that Hagrid told someone the secret to passing Fluffy would not have mattered much. Given the difference in the way Hagrid talks about it before and after the kids' trip down the trapdoor it's clear he didn't realise the significance of what he'd done until afterward. Chris: > Finally, the trio snuck out after hours. Annemehr: Again, condoned (by DD and JKR) in a good cause. The DA is another example (not after hours, but definitely against the rules). Chris: > Also, the reasons DD gave for > awarding the points was pathetic: 'Cool use of > intellect', 'the best game of chess Hogwarts has ever > seen', 'Pure Love'. I question I ask is who saw all > these to know? Annemehr (with benefit of book): Actually, it was "cool use of logic in the face of fire," "the best game of chess Hogwarts has seen in many years," and "pure nerve and outstanding courage." How did DD know? Well, the trio apparently told him, not to mention the fact that they obviously did get through them, as Harry was found in the Mirror room. Chris: > The only points I think that were deserved was > Neville's, but even then, why should he be rewarded > for doing what is right unless everyone is awarded the > same. Annemehr: *All* house points are awarded for doing what's right, and what Neville did there was not only right, but not easy. Indulge me for ending with a bit of an old post of mine to illustrate why house points may, in the books, start out with so much significance (as in many a British school story) and then gradually fade off the stage: [from http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/58817 ] -------------------------------------------------------------------- > **Koticzka: > I just cannot resist. Sacrifices made by Harry are cheapened by any sort of > prize, like Dumbledore's points for the Gryffindors. That might not change > Harry's attitude, or make the choice less painful. For the reader, though, > it might change a lot, especially when the reader is not eager or conscious > enough to consider circumstances in the world where the prize will not be > given. How can we talk of any kind of sacrifices then? Annemehr: I never really thought much about those end-of-the-year points before, and even though I read the posts about them, I was never very worked up about it, but now I wonder if you haven't come upon another theme of the series. First, why the point system at all (discussed already at greater length)? Why give this type of reward for *anything* the students do? Shouldn't they do their schoolwork for the sake of learning, not for House Points? Shouldn't they be well behaved because it's right? Shouldn't they even play Quidditch for the sake of the sport and even just the Quidditch cup without regard to the House Cup? I suppose the answer is that the young people need an extra, visible incentive to do what's right: study, play well, condsider how your actions affect other people (i.e. the rest of your House). However, you are right that the points Harry et al get at the end of PS/SS and CoS seem to be disconnected, somehow, with the reasons for their heroic actions. What does the House Cup have to do with saving Ginny Weasley's life? Ah, but maybe JKR agrees with you! Look what happens next. In PoA, Pettigrew is spared and Sirius and Buckbeak are saved, and Dumbledore holds these actions in high esteem ("Why so miserable, Harry?" he said quietly. "You shold be very proud of yourself after last night." PoA, ch. 22). Harry does not receive any points for any of this. Of course, he can't really, as it is all a secret, but neither do points seem to matter at all to either Harry or Dumbledore. Gryffindor does win the House Cup because of Quidditch anyway, so you hardly notice the departure from the first two books. Okay, so now consider GoF. Harry "wins" the TWT and the thousand Galleons prize money. Of course he shouldn't have even been in the tournament, and he had help with the tasks (as did all the champions), but who would seriously say he didn't earn the prize? And yet he is, understandably, horrified by it. He has seen murder done, has been tortured and horribly used and nearly murdered himself, and Fudge gives him 1000 Galleons? I would be surprised if House Points are ever again a driving force for Harry. ------------------------------------------------------------------- Annemehr From ceridwennight at hotmail.com Thu Jan 5 15:59:20 2006 From: ceridwennight at hotmail.com (Ceridwen) Date: Thu, 05 Jan 2006 15:59:20 -0000 Subject: First potions lesson/Harry getting special treatment In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 145965 lebeto: > > Now I might be absolutely wrong here and if so please feel free to > correct me. I thought that the colors presented in the Great Hall are > those of the previous winner which for the past seven years or so has > been the Slyths. I saw it more as a changing of the guard from last > year's winner to this year's winner. It was a little rude to leave > the awarding of the points until the last minute but I thought this > was JKR making it more dramatic than Harry seeing they won and being > told that the Trio plus Neville were awarded some points. Of course > this is all my own opinion. Ceridwen: I got the impression that the Great Hall had been decorated in Slytherin colors especially for the last feast. I've never attended a boarding school, but I did attend one that awarded an 'E' banner to the best class of the month. The points were always tallied in advance, and announced in chapel when the banner was awarded. I was thoroughly embarrassed by the late addition of points when the house cup had all but been awarded. I thought it was tacky. But, I also think JKR did it for an overt sense of satisfaction for younger readers. Ceridwen. From annemehr at yahoo.com Thu Jan 5 16:41:29 2006 From: annemehr at yahoo.com (annemehr) Date: Thu, 05 Jan 2006 16:41:29 -0000 Subject: Voldemort vs. Tom/"Stand aside, girl" and the End In-Reply-To: <7352783.1136322774329.JavaMail.administrator@webmail> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 145966 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, bawilson at c... wrote: > > Gerry: > "What we've seen of Tom Riddle is that even at eleven he was > a little jerk who stole, killed pets and traumatized children > younger than he himself. Young Tom was a thouroughly > rotten human being and certainly not someone Harry could ever > call a friend. LV reversing back in age will still result in > a rotten power-hungry person." > > > True; but one young enough to change and heal. Had Dumbledore > taken a more proactive mentoring approach to Tom, he might not > have turned to the Dark Side. > > BAW > Annemehr snags part of a post out of another thread and lays it end-to-end with this one: kchuplis wrote in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/145948 : >>You know, I was just thinking of the scene where LV comes to ask for a teaching position from DD: "The old argument," he said softly. "But nothing I have seen in the world has supported your famous pronouncements that love is more powerful than my kind of magic, Dumbledore." (HBP Scholastic pg. 444); >>Well, it is clear from this statement that Tom and DD had often had scholarly arguments of some kind over this. Despite DD's claim and even LV in GoF that he forgot it or discounted it, it is clear that it must have come up either frequently or at least vehemently enough to spur that statement to DD.<< By the way, I agree also that kchuplis has a very good theory for what LV was thinking at Godric's Hollow, particularly if his doubts about the uselessness of love at the moment were mostly subconcious, at least until after it was too late. So now I'm left with two nice explanations instead of none at all -- oh, well, it makes a nice change. In http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/145949 , hpfan_mom wrote: >> Annemehr wrote: >If Lily studied in the Veil Room, she'd potentially have even >more valuable information in LV's eyes than just the scoop on DD -- >but, you are right, she might also be much more dangerous to play >around with. Why? Because if she defied him and escaped him a fourth >time, she may have had time to figure out about the Horcruxes. hpfan_mom: >If Lily had "stood aside" and escaped Voldemort, she wouldn't have >defied him. Instead, by standing her ground and protecting Harry, >she *did* defy him, just as James did minutes earlier. Annemehr replies: Oops, sorry, I meant what I wrote to be from LV's point of view -- IF Lily worked in the Veil Room, and IF Rookwood told LV she might be getting close to finding weaknesses in LV's defences, then he might think it dangerous to allow her to duel and perhaps escape (*again*) to put her knowledge to use. Of course, from Lily's (and our) point of view, you are quite right. ~Annemehr From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Thu Jan 5 17:28:54 2006 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Thu, 05 Jan 2006 17:28:54 -0000 Subject: TBAY: Re: DD and Godric's Hollow (Long) Draught of Living Death, DD&Snape in HBP In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 145967 > > Kaylee Tonks-Lupin is strolling along the beach of Theory Bay, > > when she sees Brothergib standing on the shore. He looks rather > > lost. She walks up to Brothergib and politely asks, "May I help > > you?" He nods. Brothergib: > I feel like I'm intruding!! And despite a thorough search, I cannot > find the suitable ingredients to make a margarita - so I am > (unfortunately) completely sober! SSSusan: I'm sorry, Brothergib! Definitely not how we want people to feel around here! Sometimes people who work on a TBAY together develop idiosyncrasies... and one of them for the DRIBBLE SHADOWS is that our crew enjoys margaritas. But that's neither here nor there to what the theory is about.... Brothergib: > However, if your theory is correct, DD was desperately trying to > find Sirius, so he could apply this ointment. Therefore, at the > time of Voldemort's defeat he didn't know Harry was at Godric's > Hollow. So who told DD that Harry had defeated Voldemort? You seem > to suggest that Snape was at Hogwarts ready to apply the ointment. > Someone must have told DD? SSSusan: Actually, finding not Sirius, but Snape, for applying the ointment. Sirius didn't really play into the mix in DRIBBLE SHADOWS (unless he was the one who alerted DD about the attack). Where DRIBBLE SHADOWS started was in an attempt to tie together the protective properties we know about dragonhide and suspect about dragon's blood... with Harry's distinctive eyes/eye vulnerability... with wondering why in the WORLD it would take 24 hours for Hagrid to have delivered little Harry Potter to 4 Privet Drive. Many people have speculated about what might have happened during those "missing 24 hours" between when the GH attack occurred and when Hagrid appeared on Sirius' motorbike with Harry. The trip itself surely shouldn't have taken that long. So what might have been happening during that time which would account for the delay? No one knows for sure *how* DD learned of the attack. There have been all kinds of proposals, from a portrait in the GH home which had time enough to report in that something was amiss before the house exploded... to there having been another person present that night who contacted DD (even Sirius, before he took off to hunt down Pettigrew)... to the possibility that once people die who've been protected by the Fidelius Charm, the charm is lifted and the secret is no longer secret, so that perhaps there was a mechanism in place to alert DD once it had all gone so wrong and James & Lily had perished. Anyway, that's not really here nor there, except that we propose that by *some* means DD was alerted to the disaster at GH and sent Hagrid to assess the damage and retrieve baby Harry. DRIBBLE SHADOWS proposes more about what might have happened after this and before the gathering at Privet Drive. What I think is possible are the following: 1) Even before the attack, but knowing one was likely coming, DD wanted to come up with as many protections for the Potters as he could. And after the attack, DD did not believe that Voldy was gone for good, but rather DD strongly suspected he was still around in some form and would manage to return someday. Thus, having ways to protect Harry beyond what Lily had already done through her sacrifice would be essential. DD himself came up with the "Return to Privet Drive each year" protection. Voldy himself said, "He has been better protected than I think even he knows, protected in ways devised by Dumbledore long ago, when it fell to him to arrange the boy's future" (GoF, ch. 33). Note the way*s*, plural. 2) Snape had turned from Voldy's side to the Order's, and one of the reasons DD trusted him was not only his willingness to TELL DD about the imminent attack on the Potters but also his willingness to DO something to try to protect Harry. I think that Snape, with his incredible knowledge of potionmaking (and after HBP we now know about this more fully, as well as his creativity in creating new spells/tweaking potions recipes), was working on developing a potion (or ointment ? hey, I had to get an "O" in SHADOWS) which would provide Harry with supplemental protection. I also believe that DD ? as the person who discovered the 12 uses of dragon's blood, (which JKR has carefully NOT revealed to us beyond the oven cleaner one ;-)) suggested that Snape utilize dragon's blood in it. I also believe that Hagrid came into the picture because *someone* had to be able to extract dragon's blood, and I doubt Snape wanted to mess with THAT task. If the three of them were working on a protective potion/ointment, it nicely explains the depth of trust DD always displayed towards Snape ? he was DOING something to try to help the Potters; he was backing up his talk with action. It would also explain why Hagrid never doubted Snape either. 3) The GH attack occurred before Snape could apply the ointment -- or, alternatively, as Jen Reese suggested, James &/or Lily might have refused it! Either way, since DD was taking charge of Harry's future and believed Voldy wasn't gone forever, he had Hagrid *first* take Harry to wherever Snape was, left Baby Harry there to have this protection applied, then returned to pick Harry up for the trip to Little Whinging. Perhaps DD was off making arrangements or discussing plans with Order members at the time? Anyway, it may have taken some time for this trip, the application, and the second trip. 4) Potioncat even suggested (in TURBAN) that Harry might have a *memory* of Snape's having applied this ointment, which manifested itself in a dream Harry had in SS/PS (chapter 7) which, unusually for Harry, he DOESN'T NEXT DAY REMEMBER HAVING HAD. It was a mishmash of images, including Snape, the green flash of light, a flying motorbike, and a turban (Potioncat thought maybe he'd wrapped Harry's head in a bandage). This whole thing (esp. if Jen is right about James/Lily refusing Snape's help) could even explain one reason why Snape is so hateful to Harry. Harry, after all, has NO IDEA what Snape's already done for him, and Snape receives no credit for his efforts. It *might* even explain why Harry was able to hold out against Voldy in the graveyard duel, mightn't it? The extra protection? Harry's dragon-like ability to hold out against powerful spells? That's the gist of it, though I have a feeling it sounds rather confusing. ;-) If you or others are interested, the most substantial additions to DRIBBLE SHADOWS came through responses to Neri's critique of it, esp. from Potioncat and Jen Reese. Potioncat's: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/128795 Jen's: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/128778 http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/128892 Siriusly Snapey Susan, pleased that her little ship's still teetering and tottering in the Bay and especially that Snape's spell and potion creativity received support in HBP. Don't forget to check out Inish Alley! http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/database? method=reportRows&tbl=28 From h2so3f at yahoo.com Thu Jan 5 19:45:21 2006 From: h2so3f at yahoo.com (h2so3f) Date: Thu, 05 Jan 2006 19:45:21 -0000 Subject: Who was with Voldemort at GH? In-Reply-To: <293.37a4b1a.30edfec2@aol.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 145968 Wink45 wrote: "Do we know for sure that Regulus went to Hogwarts? At Durmstrang he might have learned about Horcruses, and figured it out from Voldemort's bragging." CH3ed: Yes, Regulus did go to Hogwarts. Slughorn told Harry in 'Horace Slughorn' Chapter when he was lamenting not getting Sirius into Slytherin because he would have liked to have the whole Black set (Sirius was a Gryffindor), but that Slug did get Regulus when he came along. Sorry, would have quoted the book but my nephew is borrowing it. CH3ed :O) From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Thu Jan 5 20:21:54 2006 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Thu, 05 Jan 2006 20:21:54 -0000 Subject: Points awarded to Trio in PS/SS WAS:Re: First potions lesson In-Reply-To: <20060105141059.11728.qmail@web31703.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 145969 Chris: > The trio did not defeat LV, and neither did Harry, he > just expelled a demon. Alla: Without Trio expelling a demon and this demon was Voldemort himself in his spirit form, Voldemort may have had a chance on getting a stone and reemerging in full glory several years earlier than he did, IMO. Chris: > How could Sliths expect to be treated with anything as > good as indifference after that stunt. DD told almost > 100 Sliths and about 200 others that no matter how > good they are or how hard they work, all it take is > one moment of stupidity that their personalities are > not wired for to be loved and win all the glory. He > all but says that standing up for what is right is > good, but not nearly as good as breaking the rules and > putting lives in danger aka "It's ok as long as the > world is saved". Alla: Erm... yes. A LOT of things are forgiven in Potterverse IMO if you are saving the world and I would not have the books any other way. It is OK for two students to go to the dangerous Chamber of Secrets because of they were saving an innocent life, it is more than OK but commendable to break the rules and use the time turner ( with the blessing of the Headmaster no less) when youa re saving not one but two innocent lives. I think JKR is very loud and clear that for higher noble purpose rules not only could be broken but SHOULD be broken. Fred and George are leaving the school as heroes after they initiated of very LOUD breaking the rules against dear Umbridge and this was not even saving the world, just act of civil disobedience, IMO. As to how Slyths could expect to be treated good after this - they WERE. They won the cup for SEVEN years. After that little fact I personally don't buy for a second that Dumbledore is in any way, shape or form prejudiced against Slytherins. It is just as Valky said - this year Trio committed IMO the act of heroism and were rewarded for that. Could Dumbledore award points earlier? I guess, but it made for such great read and I like what Pippin speculated that maybe last minutes points are often awarded, we just have not seen it. IMO of course, Alla From Wink45zes at aol.com Thu Jan 5 20:24:43 2006 From: Wink45zes at aol.com (Wink45zes at aol.com) Date: Thu, 5 Jan 2006 15:24:43 EST Subject: Who was with Voldemort at GH? Message-ID: <278.2ba49bf.30eeda8b@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 145970 CH3ed: Yes, Regulus did go to Hogwarts. Slughorn told Harry in 'Horace Slughorn' Chapter when he was lamenting not getting Sirius into Slytherin because he would have liked to have the whole Black set (Sirius was a Gryffindor), but that Slug did get Regulus when he came along. Sorry, would have quoted the book but my nephew is borrowing it. Wink45: Ah yes, thanks. I had a nagging feeling I was off course, but could not remember. Definitely need to read HBP again. *grin. Well, perhaps Regulus (if he is indeed R.A.B.) learned about the Horcruxes from Bella, but I tend to think we will never know this answer. Wink45 From bboyminn at yahoo.com Thu Jan 5 20:37:13 2006 From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Thu, 05 Jan 2006 20:37:13 -0000 Subject: Harry and Ginny - Character Development In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 145971 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "kchuplis" wrote: > > ...edited... > > One, we know the previous year Ginny relaxed around Harry. > Then Harry spent quite a bit of time at the Burrow over a > couple of summers. The summer before HBP he spent a huge > amount of time there. ...edited... Afterall, it isn't until > they get on the train and Ginny goes to be with Dean Thomas > that Harry even remembers they didn't really hang out *at > school*. ... > > Then, in the very first potions class with Slughorn Harry > smells amortentia, the "love" potion. "it reminded him > simultaneously of treacle tart, the woody smell of a > broomstick handle and something flowery he thought he might > have smelled at the Burrow" (HBP Scholastic pg 183). > > But, what interested me was pg. 192 after class: > > " "Hang on," said a voice close by Harry's left ear and he > caught a sudden waft of that flowery smell he had picked up > in Slughorn's dungeon. He looked around and saw that Ginny > had joined them. " > > He doesn't realize it on the conscious level there, but that's > IMO the big trigger for his sub-concious of Ginny Is Interesting. > ...edited... > > Just some meanderings. Feel free to slash and burn. :) > > kchuplis > bboyminn: Well you'll get no argument for me because, even though Ginny lurked in the background, I always felt like she was a strong character. I mean, is there anyone in her family that does not have a strong, determined, dare I say stubborn muleheaded, personality. Why would we expect her to be anything other than a Weasley? Also, let's remember that when we meet Ginny, she is 10 years old. At that time, Harry established a mindset that places Ginny in the catagory of Ron's little sister; just a little girl. But in the background we see Ginny growing. At around 13 or 14, she is obviously interested in and associating with 'boys'. By 15, she seems to be a very popular girl, and has lots of general friends, as well as interested boys. I think Hermione gave Ginny a very valuable piece of advice which was to set Harry aside and get on with her own life; to go out and learn to be herself. And in small subtle bits and pieces we see that start to happen. Ginny and Harry share a giggle or smirk behind someone's back. They talk more casually and associate more freely and comfortably with each other. Now Harry may at times be dense, but he's not blind. He can see that Ginny is not 10 years old anymore. She has grown into a young woman, but Harry, in a sense, has blocked her out by catagorising her as 'Ron's little sister'. Yet as Ginny develops a social life of her own, establishing both friends and boyfriends, at least subconsciously, Harry can't help but notice. Finally, I agree that their association at the Burrow over the summer contributed to making their relationship more free, casual, and comfortable. Indeed as you point out, on the train, Harry just assumed in Ron and Hermione's absents, that he would hang out with Ginny. I think at that point the "Ron's little sister" cord was broken. Harry saw that Ginny wasn't an extension of Ron, but an independant being. This happens in real life as well. At one point, my brother's best friend never gave the slightest notice to my little sister, but as she grew and 'developed', so did his interest. Eventually he married her. So, at some point, perhaps in the blink of an eye or the turn of a phrase, she went from 'little sister' to 'desirable woman'. By the way, gentleman that he is, he asked my brother's permission before dating my sister, and notice that Harry also seeks Ron's permission to date Ginny. Although, I've always thought that Ron was trying to steer them toward each other. There are those who will say Ginny's character was poorly developed, and will defend that position vigorously. I, on the other hand, have no problem with Ginny developing off-page as she has with no more than the smallest clues to her development. As I said, being a Weasley and having 6 older brothers, how could she be anything other than what she is, a headstrong, talented, powerful, self-determined woman. Also notice that Ginny's character has come to full development just as the Twins are leaving Hogwarts. It's the perfect time for Ginny to assert herself to fill the void left by the Twins. I guess your reaction to Ginny is based on your expectations. Those who expected Ginny to remain forever a simpering love-struck little girl can't seem to fathom the change. Others, like myself, always expected and anticipated that Ginny would be who she has become, so we are neither surprise or disappointed. Just a few thoguths. Steve/bboyminn From belviso at attglobal.net Thu Jan 5 20:45:49 2006 From: belviso at attglobal.net (sistermagpie) Date: Thu, 05 Jan 2006 20:45:49 -0000 Subject: First potions lesson/Harry getting special treatment In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 145972 > Valky: > Exactly! It looked as though Dumbledore was punishing Slytherin House, > because he *was*, in a sense. And some may say why didn't he do this > before if Slytherin had always been cheating but there was one large > difference in this year compared to the ones coming before - a group > of kids from Gryffindor house other had done something remarkable. DD > then was able to fairly give a gigantic points boost big enough to > overcome Slytherin's usual ridiculous lead. > > Basically I think the point is that Harry and Co had done them all (DD > and Hogwarts including Slytherin) a favour because his actions had > enabled Dumbledore the means to demonstrate the true meaning of House > virtue to the school. Magpie: So if it seems Dumbledore did something that blatantly dissed an entire quarter of the student body we should write an elaborate backstory where they deserved it with no evidence? That seems silly to me. We know nothing about Slytherin always having any sort of ridiculous lead in the past. Snape is rarely if ever shown awarding random points to his house. Draco doesn't seem to be racking up points right and left dishonestly anywhere that I remember (except in OotP when it's acknowledged that the point system is no longer valid). We see the Slytherins doing obnoxious stuff in canon, but there's no evidence they ever had this kind of power--most of the time they seem like they'd rarely get awarded points at all. All the teachers seem to keep things fair amongst themselves. Dumbledore's been headmaster for a long time and Slytherins only won for however many years. Here's my theory on what happened: JKR wanted to make the victory as big as possible so she intentionally had the Slytherins insulted and shown to be not as good as Harry. She wanted to humiliate the Slytherins and used Dumbledore to do it, and didn't think she needed a reason other than it would make Harry happy (which was quite possibly DD's motivation). It's possible to read less obnoxious things into it, like by saying that the previous winner's banners are always up and the contest wasn't really over yet, but it seems like JKR wanted the idea to be that Slytherin won and everyone knew it, and then Dumbledore intentionally made them un-win and handed the cup to the kids who deserved it more. That's the way most people seem to experience it. If Ron had just said, "Unless we manage to win 150 points on the way to the banquet, they won," or something, it wouldn't be an issue. kchulpis: At any rate, maybe you've all talked about this (I searched and didn't see anything but Yahoo's search function is less than ideal) and maybe some of you have seen that paragraph, but it was the first time it sunk in with me and I just found it an excellent connector in the the progression of this relationship. In fact, I've actually been aware (probalby because I am reading it after the big iscussion of a couple of weeks ago) of all kinds of very small sentences here and there that are before the "purring beast" wakes, that are pretty indicative that Harry does see Ginny in a much different light than previous years. Magpie: God I hated that scene. I think I dropped the book in annoyance. H/G had been already so heavily foreshadowed did we really need Harry to have to follow his nose to the Special Ginny Flowery Smell? Not that I wanted lots of emphasis on teen romance in HBP (I had a hard enough time getting through what we had), but I did have to laugh at the way the romance had to be handled exactly like the other Junior Mysteries. Making it clear that Ginny's the most amazing girl on the planet was enough reason to figure out that she was right for Harry. (And just for the record, yes, I always considered Ginny to have a perfectly strong personality outside of having a crush on Harry and no, I did not buy the change between GoF and OotP. I preferred the personality she had before the "real one.") -m From horridporrid03 at yahoo.com Thu Jan 5 21:49:59 2006 From: horridporrid03 at yahoo.com (horridporrid03) Date: Thu, 05 Jan 2006 21:49:59 -0000 Subject: last minute points was Re: First potions lesson/Harry getting special treatment In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 145973 > >>Pippin: > > There is no murmur of astonishment when Dumbledore announces that > last minute points will be awarded. There is nothing to show that > this is not a fine old Hogwarts tradition, very much in keeping > with the wizards' love of drama, except for Ron's statement a few > days before that the points are all in and Slytherin has won. > > >>Finwitch: > It may be that in the Welcoming Feast all Houses are presented in > the decoration, and in case of death (Cedric Diggory) the > decoration is black - otherwise the colours of the leading house > are shown in decoration. They *always* know the leading house, > don't they? > Slytherin was leading until the points Dumbledore awarded. > Therefore the decoration was in their colour. Betsy Hp: I would have loved it if either of those explanations were true. But, unfortunately, canon tells us otherwise. "[The Great Hall] was decked out in the Slytherin colors of green and silver to celebrate Slytherin's winning of the house cup for the seventh year in a row." (SS scholastic paperback ed. p.304) "The Great Hall was normally decorated with the winning House's colors for the Leaving Feast." (GoF scholastic hardback ed p.720) In both PS/SS and GoF JKR clearly tells us that the *winning* House determines the color scheme of the Leaving Feast. Slytherin went into the Feast sure that they had won. And Dumbledore snatched it away from them. Not kind. Not kind at all. It's certainly dramatic, and JKR may have chosen to do things this way for that reason. And it could be, as Potioncat suggested, an out of character moment for Dumbledore. But I cannot write this off as a JKR moment rather than a Dumbledore one, otherwise I'd be free to right off any behavior I disliked seeing in a particular character. (e.g. Draco could care less about blood purity, but JKR *needed* someone to spout that rhetoric... etc, etc.) So why does Dumbledore make such a colossal mistake? (Assuming the Sorting Hat is correct.) > >>Valky: > > It looked as though Dumbledore was punishing Slytherin House, > because he *was*, in a sense. > > Basically I think the point is that Harry and Co had done them all > (DD and Hogwarts including Slytherin) a favour because his actions > had enabled Dumbledore the means to demonstrate the true meaning > of House virtue to the school. Betsy Hp: Oh, ick! I really, really, hope not. Because if this were the case (and I agree with Magpie that you're building off of a lot of assumptions here, Valky) I'd have to agree with Lupinlore, Dumbledore should never be allowed authority over children. This kind of passive-aggressive, psychological cruelty is *not* the proper way to punish children for wrong doing. Telling Slytherin that cheating to gain house points is wrong, and then taking those points away from them would be the proper and educational way of facing that problem. If it even exists. (How does one cheat a professor into giving unearned points?) So no, this explanation definitely doesn't work for me. The only one that *does* work for me is the idea that Dumbledore is so darn proud of Harry, and feels so darn guilty over the points lost with the Norbert incident, he behaves rather foolishly and manages to strengthen the House divisions at a time when he should be working his ass off to bring the Houses together. (Frankly, I think this is a place where Dumbledore is notoriously weak. He just does not know how to bring rivals together. Canon is full of his failures.) Again, I'm not arguing the points. The trio and Neville were very brave and I think they did deserve their points. (Though I'll again remind everyone that Harry did *not* defeat Voldemort, or Quirrell for that matter. Dumbledore did both, saving Harry's life in the process.) I do, however, have a huge problem with how, where and when the points were delivered. Betsy Hp From kchuplis at alltel.net Thu Jan 5 21:24:05 2006 From: kchuplis at alltel.net (kchuplis) Date: Thu, 05 Jan 2006 21:24:05 -0000 Subject: Ginny in HBP and a little SHIP Harry/Ginny WAS: Re: First potions lesson In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 145974 > Magpie: > > God I hated that scene. I think I dropped the book in annoyance. > H/G had been already so heavily foreshadowed did we really need > Harry to have to follow his nose to the Special Ginny Flowery Smell? You know, I just don't get why some people even read this series if such things annoy them let alone spend any amount of time talking about them. You *hated* that scene? I didn't feel that any of the Harry and Ginny stuff was heavily over shadowed. I guess I'm just dimwitted or something. I hear people yelling about how it came out of nowhere as well as now you saying it was all so heavy handed and I have to wonder if I am reading the same series as everyone else. It's interesting because as I said I thought that little connector was particularly well done. > > Not that I wanted lots of emphasis on teen romance in HBP (I had a > hard enough time getting through what we had), but I did have to > laugh at the way the romance had to be handled exactly like the > other Junior Mysteries. Making it clear that Ginny's the most > amazing girl on the planet was enough reason to figure out that she > was right for Harry. > I don't see Ginny as the most amazing girl in the world. Spunky, yes. Witty, yes. A decent athlete. What is so "amazing" about her? She just seems fun. Was she supposed to be a complete dweeb? Please tell me what you read that makes her so amazing aside from she puts out a good Bat Bogey Hex? I just don't understand this antipathy. > (And just for the record, yes, I always considered Ginny to have a > perfectly strong personality outside of having a crush on Harry and > no, I did not buy the change between GoF and OotP. I preferred the > personality she had before the "real one.") > > > What was the "change"?? I have now read these books three times and I do not see this huge character discrepancy some of you refer to. Please show me some canon where Ginny has undergone some gigantic personality change because I just don't see it and I'd really like some help on where this is written. Some dialogue, some exposition from the books, just something to help me see your point of view. kchuplis From horridporrid03 at yahoo.com Thu Jan 5 22:14:04 2006 From: horridporrid03 at yahoo.com (horridporrid03) Date: Thu, 05 Jan 2006 22:14:04 -0000 Subject: CHAPDISC: HBP7, The Slug Club - Draco's mercy In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 145975 > >>Betsy Hp: > > > > Draco is not just a happy little Death Eater in training. I > > think this insight coupled with his blindspot regarding Draco's > > humanity is what leads to Harry being petrified on the > > compartment floor, completely at Draco's mercy. > >>Carol: > Rather than answering the question, I'm just going to respond to > this portion of Betsy's comment. I agree that Harry underestimated > Draco in this scene but I don't see how this incident relates to > Draco's humanity. > Betsy Hp: Heh. Yeah, I'm not sure what I meant here either. Um, I was really tired when I wrote this? I was trying to say something about Harry getting that Draco's up to something but missing how dangerous Draco could be if Harry is right. (Harry's POV: "Draco's a full on Death Eater now, so I'll sneak onto his turf without letting anyone know where I'm going and I'll totally let my guard down while I do so." Imagine this scene but with Bellatrix as the prey.) He definitely underestimates Draco's cunning. And I was trying to tie it in with Draco's obvious breakdown throughout the schoolyear that Harry sees but fails to fully understand. (It's like he sees Draco but doesn't really *see* him, if that makes sense.) So, um, yeah. Moving on! > >>Carol: > > And his "mercy" is nonexistent--he petrifies Harry, stomps on his > face and breaks his nose, covers him with the invisibility cloak > so he won't be found, but takes care to observe where his hand is > so he can tread on it on his way out. > > I'm assuming you meant mercy ironically since IMO neither mercy > nor humanity is much in evidence here. > Betsy Hp: Well, no. I meant that Harry was literally at Draco's mercy. What Draco chose to do with Harry was completely up to Draco. "At his mercy" generally means, as I've always used it anyway, that the power is pretty much all on one side. And Draco, while certainly not full of mercy, does show a remarkable amount of restraint, IMO. He could have worked Harry over a bit, or hexed Harry into a shape not recognizably human. Or Draco could have killed Harry. And all Draco does is break Harry's nose and step on him on the way out. And then it's done, as far as Draco seems concerned. I don't think Draco has much to do with Harry from that point on. I'm not saying Draco behaved like a little angel in this scene. But he could have behaved so much worse. > >>Carol: > I don't think his more or less accurate assessment of Draco has > any bearing on that great enigma, Snape, however. Harry, as we'll > see in the next chapter, is determined to see the worst in him. > Betsy Hp: I've started to wonder if Snape wasn't counting on this when he went to fetch Harry instead of letting Hagrid do it. Harry gets so caught up in cataloging the many, many ways he hates Snape that he forgets about Draco for the most part. He certainly doesn't report Draco to anyone. Which may well have saved Draco's life. Betsy Hp From xcpublishing at yahoo.com Thu Jan 5 22:36:17 2006 From: xcpublishing at yahoo.com (xcpublishing) Date: Thu, 05 Jan 2006 22:36:17 -0000 Subject: Subject: Re: Potion in the Cave Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 145976 I've been lurking, but this one caught my attention. Carol wrote: >Voldemort would have no reason to remove his own Horcrux unless he thought it was in danger of being discovered. The potion ...is to prevent it from being taken from the cave once it was retrieved. This was never quite plausible to me. I could not understand why LV would not want to kill the potion drinker immediately - like after the first sip! - in order to prevent them from getting their hands on the Horcrux at all. Why allow them to drink it all down and possibly escape with the locket? I really hope JKR has a good explanation for this one, other than the need to weaken DD for his confrontation with Snape. The only explanation I could accept was that there would be some sort of magical alarm raised for LV when the Horcrux was discovered - he might want that person alive to question and determine how he found out about the Horcrux in the first place. But I would expect LV to Apparate to the cave immediately after the alarm was raised, and obviously that didn't happen. >If, as most of us suspect, the locket we glimpsed at 12 GP in OoP is the real Horcrux, there's at least one remaining protection: It's sealed shut. I would expect that to be the case. I'm actually wondering if Regulus tried to destroy the Horcrux and ended up frying himself in the process. They say he was "killed by LV" but never mentions how. The other Blacks and DEs would have assumed LV killed him because he was already in disfavor. And depending on the timing (interesting how timing is everything when it comes to the final book) R.A.B. could have been taking the locket about the time LV was preoccupied with the Potters... which is why LV never discovered the Horcrux was missing. >There may be a curse like the one on the ring to punish the person who destroys it as well. Given all that, I see no reason to doubt that either Voldemort or someone he trusted (Bellatrix?) placed the locket in the cave along with the protective potion/poisoned memory. I agree with this theory and leaning toward Bellatrix, although I'm doubting she knew what it was. All LV would have to do is hand her the locket and told her to go drop it off in the cave. He could have set up the basin, the potion, and the whole scenario long prior to the creation of the Horcrux itself. He could have told Bella it was a little trap for his enemies and she likely would not have questioned it at all. Go to the cave, plink the locket into the basin, and get out. I'm sure it would have also amused him not to have mentioned the need for her to cross the lake and escape the Inferi. She would have had to figure that out on her own. >I very much doubt that it was R.A.B.'s potion specifically intended for LV, or that LV knew the Horcrux had been taken. I agree. The potion seems much too likely to have been put there by Voldemort. I'm also leaning toward Kreacher being the initial recipient of the potion. The Blacks seem to have had the same attitude toward house-elves as the Malfoy's, frankly, and I don't see Regulas as being noble enough to care what happened to Kreacher. This could also be what tipped the nasty little thing into madness. >To impress on her the importance of her mission, he actually entrusts Bellatrix with the secret that it's a Horcrux (though not that it's one of six). Bellatrix, feeling both honored by this assignment but afraid that she can't do it alone (and well aware of the consequences of failure), borrows her dear aunt's devoted house- elf, Kreacher (whom we know to be devoted to "Miss Bellatrix"), to help her with her task. I can't see LV divulging the Horcrux information to anyone, no matter how loyal they appear. I just don't see him as the trusting sort, and this would be his most precious secret. He would have let the DEs know that he would return if death could claim him, but I don't think he would tell them HOW. Most of the DEs really believed him to be dead and gone. Only the most fanatical thought he would return and I think that was mostly based on their own desire rather than by logic. Those with enough curiosity, however (like R.A.B.) would start wondering exactly how LV was planning to return. >Trusting entirely to Kreacher's loyalty and not crediting him with intelligence equal to a human's, she lets slip that the thing she's hiding is a Horcrux. Exactly why LV would never give her this information. She might be loyal, but she's a loose cannon. >Already having been Crucio'd for refusing to torture or kill a Muggle (or some similar assignment) Or for spending all of his time poring over ancient texts and researching artifacts instead of killing Muggles... >He questions Kreacher about his excursion and discovers that Bellatrix has hidden a locket in a cave and that she refers to the locket as a Horcrux. Or he finds out about the cave from Kreacher and forms his own opinion about the Horcrux. >After discovering what a Horcrux is (if he doesn't know already), Regulus writes the note to LV, buys a locket superficially similar to the one Kreacher describes, and then orders Kreacher to take him to the cave. The boat takes them both across to the island, not sensing the presence of Kreacher (as other posters have already speculated). Regulus orders Kreacher to drink the poisoned memory/potion (which addles his brains permanently), substitutes the locket with the note inside for the Horcrux, and returns home with the Horcrux, which he, being barely a fully qualified wizard and not particularly skilled at curse-breaking, is unable to open and consequently destroy. Or he tries to destroy it and ends up dead. Or LV figures out what he's been researching during the past few weeks and shows up to kill him. Or Bellatrix kills him because Kreacher confesses that they went to the cave. (After drinking down that nasty potion, Kreacher would likely have been pretty out of it and not known that Regulas switched the lockets. I picture him down at the lake lapping up water while Regulas makes the swap.) This might even prompt a quick return by Bella to the cave to make sure the locket is still where she left it - yep, still in there, so she wouldn't have to mention it to LV and spare herself a little wrath because surely he would ask how Regulus even knew about the cave... A quick zap of Regulus would ensure he never return to the cave and put herself in even better standing with LV by her lack of reluctance to kill a blood relative that was out of favor... >Holes in the theory, anybody? Or improvements, if you like it but see a flaw or two (like the pensievelike bowl already being in the cave)? I do think most of the materials were set up in advance. LV knew about the cave from boyhood and he had plenty of time to engineer the hiding of the Horcruxes even before their creation. I really wish JKR would have given us a tad more information on exactly how Regulas was killed and what the timing was. Either R.A.B. had the locket for quite some time and didn't destroy it and LV never caught on, or the locket was taken during LV1 when he was distracted and then the locket taker was killed before he could destroy it... Nicky Joe who needs to read the last two books again... From belviso at attglobal.net Thu Jan 5 22:36:21 2006 From: belviso at attglobal.net (sistermagpie) Date: Thu, 05 Jan 2006 22:36:21 -0000 Subject: Ginny in HBP and a little SHIP Harry/Ginny WAS: Re: First potions lesson In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 145977 kchuplis: > You know, I just don't get why some people even read this series if > such things annoy them let alone spend any amount of time talking > about them. Magpie: You don't understand why I read the series and talk about it if I say I hated scene in it? I guess I'm just as baffled by that perspective as you are by mine. Why should I have to like everything in a book to want to read it or talk about it? Actually, I tend to participate in fandoms where when I have something to work out. If I'm just happy with a book there's less to say for me. kchuplis: You *hated* that scene? I didn't feel that any of the > Harry and Ginny stuff was heavily over shadowed. I guess I'm just > dimwitted or something. I hear people yelling about how it came out > of nowhere as well as now you saying it was all so heavy handed and I > have to wonder if I am reading the same series as everyone else. It's > interesting because as I said I thought that little connector was > particularly well done. Magpie: That's why we can discuss it, because we all have different impressions. Some people thought H/Hr was heavily foreshadowed and I never got that. It's not written completely dreadfully, but it does read fairly obviously to me what JKR is doing in the two main ships. I wish I was you in thinking that little connector was particularly well done. It was a serious eye-roller for me. kchuplis: > What was the "change"?? I have now read these books three times and I > do not see this huge character discrepancy some of you refer to. > Please show me some canon where Ginny has undergone some gigantic > personality change because I just don't see it and I'd really like > some help on where this is written. Some dialogue, some exposition > from the books, just something to help me see your point of view. Magpie: Well, it's commented on in the text (Oh, is that why she's different? Because she talks now? ) so I don't think I have to prove it was there. Her speech pattern changes significantly between her last appearance in GoF and her first appearance in OotP. I've written more extensively about those two scenes comparing the two and breaking it down line by line to show the different personality put across in the two scenes, but I don't think this is the place for that. Suffice to say I could tell from her very first line in OotP that Ginny's going to be different in this book and was not wrong--and since this is confirmed within the text by Harry noticing she seems different and fandom discussing it and the author afaik confirming that yes, she's not shy around him any more so now he's seeing the "real her" for the first time I see no reason to not accept that the change isn't there, that the author didn't do it on purpose. I just can't reconcile the two characters. In fact, when people reconcile them for me they often seem to go against what the author seems to be admittedly going for and suggest the reasons for the change. Rowling says the hint is Ron saying Ginny "never shuts up" in CoS, but HBP Ginny isn't a chatterbox either. She rarely speaks more than she needs to. I think when people say it "came out of nowhere" and others say it was heavily foreshadowed they're referring to two different things. The second group is referring to hints in the text that Harry would eventually see Ginny as his ideal girl, the first group is wanting scenes of Harry and Ginny together where they see a real connection between them and can feel the relationship along with them. Imo, anyway. Basically, imagine if in the next book Neville suddenly developed Zach Smith's personality. That's what reading OotP is like for me with Ginny. I understand that she's supposed to be the same girl and I accept it because to do otherwise is to pointlessly fight it, but this particular trick in canon doesn't work for me at all and I figure I might as well say that. I see both Ginny's as very consistent, just not with each other. I think it's supposed to be a comment on boys and girls growing up and I get that part of it, it just doesn't work for me at all. Believe me, I wish it did, because I'd enjoy it more, but liking everything isn't a requirement for me. BetsyHP: In both PS/SS and GoF JKR clearly tells us that the *winning* House determines the color scheme of the Leaving Feast. Slytherin went into the Feast sure that they had won. And Dumbledore snatched it away from them. Not kind. Not kind at all. Magpie: Ah! I knew there was a reason we all read it that way. -m From horridporrid03 at yahoo.com Thu Jan 5 22:46:16 2006 From: horridporrid03 at yahoo.com (horridporrid03) Date: Thu, 05 Jan 2006 22:46:16 -0000 Subject: Ginny in HBP and a little SHIP Harry/Ginny WAS: Re: First potions lesson In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 145978 > >>Magpie: > > God I hated that scene. I think I dropped the book in > > annoyance. > > > >>kchuplis: > You know, I just don't get why some people even read this series > if such things annoy them let alone spend any amount of time > talking about them. You *hated* that scene? I didn't feel that any > of the Harry and Ginny stuff was heavily over shadowed. I guess > I'm just dimwitted or something. I hear people yelling about how > it came out of nowhere as well as now you saying it was all so > heavy handed and I have to wonder if I am reading the same series > as everyone else. It's interesting because as I said I thought > that little connector was particularly well done. Betsy Hp: Speaking for myself, I ain't reading it for the romance. Frankly, I think JKR places very little importance on the romance aspect of the story and when she writes about it, prefers to do so in a comedic way. (The Bill/Fluer and Ron/Lavender romances were much more realistic and interesting to my mind, and they read like they'd been written more naturally, IMO.) I don't think Harry/Ginny came out of nowhere. That particular coupling has been brewing from the very first book. Now I do think this particular version of *Ginny* came out of nowhere. So while I enjoyed their first kiss I didn't much enjoy Ginny. A bit too spunky, sparkley, "pretty little princess in combat boots" for me. > >>kchuplis: > I don't see Ginny as the most amazing girl in the world. Spunky, > yes. Witty, yes. A decent athlete. What is so "amazing" about > her? She just seems fun. > Betsy Hp: Oh, yeah, Ginny is superfun! Life of the party! Soul of the quidditch team! Righter of wrongs! Scurge of that ass-hat, Zach Smith! (Damn him and his questions!) Favorite of Slughorn! Darling of the twins! And just to cement her super-cool status -- itty bitty sister from hell to Ron. > >>kchuplis: > Was she supposed to be a complete dweeb? Betsy Hp: A flaw or two might have been nice. An acknowledged flaw, anyway. She does have an enormous chip on her shoulder and can go from quiet to raging fury in sixty seconds, but I get the sense that's supposed to be a plus in JKR's eyes. (If it's a left over Voldemort piece and it turns out her personality changes were from her brush with a horcrux I will take everything I said about her and JKR's handling of her back. I will also be thrilled beyond measure. But I fear this will not happen.) > >>kchuplis: > What was the "change"?? I have now read these books three times > and I do not see this huge character discrepancy some of you refer > to. > Betsy Hp: She goes from ho-hum about quidditch in GoF to super quidditch genius. She goes from amused from afar by the twins to more twin than the twins. And she goes from loving Ron to hating him. I've catalogued all this before here: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/144816 I know not everyone agrees that Ginny was handled badly, but those of who do think she was aren't basing it on nothing. Betsy Hp From darkmatter30 at yahoo.com Thu Jan 5 22:50:10 2006 From: darkmatter30 at yahoo.com (Richard) Date: Thu, 05 Jan 2006 22:50:10 -0000 Subject: How do you prove trustworthiness? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 145979 Frankly, I'm not on any side, when it comes to Snape being DDM!, ESE!, OFH! or anything else you care to mention. I think it is up to JKR to tell us in her own good time where Snape ends up in the tale she is telling. That doesn't mean I'm uninterested. There have been some good arguments in each direction, with one hole that I've not seen filled with regard to the DDM!Snape theorists. (The prima facie evidence for ESE! is, I believe, sufficient in its own right.) Perhaps I've just missed the posts where this hole has been filled ... any easy thing, considering the fact that I don't have the time, nor the finances, to make reading posts a career. My apologies to others if this is something I've missed ... So, let's assume that Snape is either DDM! or OFH!(but anti-LV) (let's call that one OFHbaLV!Snape. It thus behoves Snape to eventually find a way to prove his reliability (at least with regard to trying to kill or otherwise defeat Voldemort) to Harry. So, how does he do that? If there is no plausible way for him to do this, I think it puts a real, and perhaps fatal, hole in both the DDM! and OFHbaLV! theories. The best way that has been mentioned (or at least that I've seen mentioned) is a combination of Portrait!Dumbledore and Dumbledore's memories a la Pensieve. I think this weak because of the fact that Harry saw Snape "kill" Dumbledore, and is now convinced that Dumbledore was tragically mistaken with regard to Snape. I don't think even Portrait!Dumbledore telling Harry, "You know I was dying, so I told Snape to finish me off so he could see that all the Death Eaters left Hogwarts without harming any students ... including both you and Draco," would really accomplish this. What would convince Harry that Snape should be trusted to any appreciable extent? I think Portrait!Dumbledore would have to play a part, and a couple of Pensieve memories from Dumbledore would help, but would Dumbledore have been sufficiently prescient to have included "Why I trust Snape" memories set aside for Harry? Or was what Snape had shared with Dumbledore of such a nature that Dumbledore would not feel it proper to share it with Harry? About the only way I can see through this problem is a combination of Portrait!Dumbledore giving assurances to Harry and getting Harry to use the Pensieve filled with Snape's memories. But, which memories, and how would Snape (or anyone else) be able to control the sequence that Harry viewed them (which might make a major difference in their interpretation). There is one way for Snape himself to control the sequencing of memories that would convince Harry that Snape really is working against Voldemort: He could give Harry a bottle containing his (Snape's) memory of re-experiencing those memories in a Pensieve. Imagine a scene where Harry enters a Pensieve containing this memory. He falls into the memory, and finds himself seated across a Pensieve from Snape, who (with all the usual snide and bitter comments) explains why he did what he did, then sequentially pours his own memories into the Pensieve ... and dives in. As the experience of reliving these memories would be part of the memory Snape bottled, we have an doubly indirect experience of these events by Harry in precisely the order Snape wishes them to be presented, and with suitable commentary and explanation from Snape as fellow spectator. Would this be sufficient to re-establish some level of trust in Snape (for purposes of combatting Voldemort) in Harry that DDM! and OFHbaLV!Snape's are plausible? I think so, but would appreciate comments from others about other ways of keeping all the DDM!, OFH!, ESE! and other Snape's in play. (I think, for the purposes of JKR's tale, it is actually important for her to keep all these options open, so as to maintain dramatic tension, which is why I'm willing to let her decide how and when to resolve this.) Richard, who enjoys a good theory, provided it makes sense. From agdisney at msn.com Thu Jan 5 23:12:28 2006 From: agdisney at msn.com (Andrea Grevera) Date: Thu, 5 Jan 2006 18:12:28 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: The Dursleys References: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 145980 > The Dursleys have apparently agreed to house Harry at Privet Drive. Have the Dursleys invited Ron and Hermione to stay with them? But I expect it will be something like "Dumbledore is dead and the baddies are now after Harry." Two adult wizards are good to have in the house in such times, like Steve said. So there will be much grinding of teeth and much counting of hours until finally the 31th of July will arrive and the Dursleys can throw the litte pesk into the streets. Gerry Andie Who says Harry has to stay at the Dursley's until the 31st? All Harry has to do is spend 1 night at Privet Dr for the protection to be in place. Harry doesn't have the time to hang around the Dursley's until the end of July. He has hunting to do and a wedding to go to. Before posting to any list, you MUST read the group's Admin File! http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/files/Admin_Files/HBF_Text__MUST_READ Please use accurate subject headings and snip unnecessary material from posts to which you're replying! Yahoo! Groups Links [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From foxmoth at qnet.com Thu Jan 5 23:21:55 2006 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Thu, 05 Jan 2006 23:21:55 -0000 Subject: last minute points was Re: First potions lesson/Harry getting special treatment In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 145981 > > > >>Pippin: > > > > There is no murmur of astonishment when Dumbledore announces that > > last minute points will be awarded. There is nothing to show that > > this is not a fine old Hogwarts tradition, very much in keeping > > with the wizards' love of drama, except for Ron's statement a few > > days before that the points are all in and Slytherin has won. > > > Betsy Hp: > I would have loved it if either of those explanations were true. > But, unfortunately, canon tells us otherwise. > > "[The Great Hall] was decked out in the Slytherin colors of green > and silver to celebrate Slytherin's winning of the house cup for the > seventh year in a row." (SS scholastic paperback ed. p.304) > > "The Great Hall was normally decorated with the winning House's > colors for the Leaving Feast." (GoF scholastic hardback ed p.720) > > In both PS/SS and GoF JKR clearly tells us that the *winning* House > determines the color scheme of the Leaving Feast. Slytherin went > into the Feast sure that they had won. And Dumbledore snatched it > away from them. Not kind. Not kind at all. Pippin: The narration sometimes relays Harry's perceptions as fact, most famously when Harry's parents are said to have died in a car crash. So while I will accept that the colors honored Slytherin as the leader, since that is corroborated in a later book when Harry is familiar with Hogwarts procedures, I think that last minute points and changes of decoration may not be unheard of. Snape doesn't look surprised when Gryffindor wins, and again, nobody but Draco is shown to be astonished. I can see Draco as not believing that Dumbledore would erase such a strong lead, and nobody seeing any percentage in trying to convince him otherwise. As for why the points weren't awarded before, Harry was in the hospital wing. Points are always awarded in person and I'm sure Mme P wouldn't have allowed anything so exciting. I think this is part of JKR showing us that however fair-minded Harry thinks he is, he's not above warming to a bit of what seems to be favoritism on his behalf. But that doesn't mean it's really favoritism. Pippin From irene_mikhlin at btopenworld.com Thu Jan 5 23:29:56 2006 From: irene_mikhlin at btopenworld.com (Irene Mikhlin) Date: Thu, 5 Jan 2006 23:29:56 +0000 (GMT) Subject: Special treatment - yes or no Message-ID: <20060105232956.29439.qmail@web86206.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 145982 Before I start the long list of the instances where I think Hogwarts authorities provided special treatment either for Harry, or Gryffindor in general, a disclaimer: You don't need to refute it with the claims that Harry is a nice kid who didn't ask for special treatment, but deserves it all anyway. Meta-arguments about this treatment to be necessary for plot reasons also miss the point. The point of the exercise is to demonstrate that other houses (who don't have an insider information about Harry's character or the broader context of the fight with Voldemort) have a good reason to perceive Harry as Headmaster's pet. Have you noticed that he is not very popular with Hufflepuff and Ravenclaw either, at least until book 6? They are very quick to believe the worst of him. Now to the list. PS: 1. Even before the Hogwarts starts - if it was any other child, would the school be so insistent that he gets his letter? Generally speaking, can muggle parents ever refuse for a child to go? Probably not, but that a subject for another discussion about Wizard-Muggle "relations". (Note - I don't wish that the rules were followed to a 't' and Harry was kept from Hogwarts. Applies to the rest of the list, really). 2. Would a school official take any other child shopping? 3. Tea with Hagrid. It looks in fact that Hagrid is running his own little club, just like Slughorn. Only the favours he asks in return are much more serious than a box of pineapple sweets: could you get rid of this illegal dragon for me, kids? Could you help me to prepare for the trial? Could you look after my giant brother? 4. Broomstick incident, of course. Instead of punishment, Harry is rewarded with his own broom and place on the team. 5. Dumbledore finds Harry in front of the mirror - out after curfew, third night in the row, no punishment. 6. Dumbledore returns the cloak that was confiscated after some rule-breaking. I don't count the fact that he gave Harry the cloak in the first place, that was indeed just returning the property, would've done it for any student. But "just in case" business? Teacher's pet. :-) CoS: 7. McGonagall does not take points for flying car. If Ron and Harry consider themselves lucky, I won't argue with them. Minerva obviously cares about the House cup. 8. Gryffindor's ghost conspires to get Harry out of detention. 9. Harry lies about finding Mrs. Norris. Dumbledore seems to know it (a bit of legilimency), but lets him to get away with it. 10. Harry and Ron break emergency rules, walking the corridors without a teacher. But since they come up with a noble story, McGonagall does not punish them. PoA: 11. Fudge gives Harry some serious celebrity treatment. 12. Another Hogwarts official (who just happens to be a Gryffindor) invites Harry for a cup of tea. 13. Madame Hooch is asked to supervise the trainings, because McGonagall doesn't want to reduce team's chances of winning. 14. That's a big one: the very same Professor, who just happens to be a Gryffindor, covers a huge rule-breaking episode (never mind madly security-breaking), and Harry gets off without any punishment. 15. Out of bounds, after curfew, nearly got Ron killed, but nevermind - the Headmaster has a special task for Harry and Hermione. GoF: Letting Harry into the tournament is not exactly a special treatment, as any student would have had to compete under the binding magical contract. However, taking his word that he didn't ask an older student to put his name in, might well be. 16. The Headmaster accepts Hogsmeade permission from someone who is not Harry's parent or guardian, nevermind being a convicted criminal at the time. 17. Hagrid shows Harry the dragons. 18. Harry goes into Dumbledore's pensieve - no punishment. OoTP: 19. Would the school try to get any of the students acquitted in a stitch-up trial like this? Probably yes. Would they go to such lengths, up to producing false witnesses? Probably not. The rest of this year does not matter, as it was not under Hogwarts normal system of rules. HBP: I can't be bothered to go through the details in this one, Dumbledore has practically adopted Harry in this book. Again - I know that saving the world is more important than following the rules. But first of all other characters are not privy to "saving the world" context, and some of the cases above have nothing to do with it. Irene ___________________________________________________________ To help you stay safe and secure online, we've developed the all new Yahoo! Security Centre. http://uk.security.yahoo.com From hickengruendler at yahoo.de Fri Jan 6 00:29:11 2006 From: hickengruendler at yahoo.de (hickengruendler) Date: Fri, 06 Jan 2006 00:29:11 -0000 Subject: Special treatment - yes or no In-Reply-To: <20060105232956.29439.qmail@web86206.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 145983 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Irene Mikhlin wrote: > > Before I start the long list of the instances where I > think > Hogwarts authorities provided special treatment either > for Harry, > or Gryffindor in general, a disclaimer: Well, yes and no. In some points I agree with you (and those are the ones I did not mention anymore), but some do not convince me. > Now to the list. > > PS: > > 1. Even before the Hogwarts starts - if it was any > other child, > would the school be so insistent that he gets his > letter? That might be true. However, is it because they really looked forward to have Harry in Hogwarts, or because Dumbledore knew that Harry is the one who really needed it the most, for his own sake and the sake of the Wizarding World? In other words, isn't it understandable that after hearing the prophecy Dumbledore thinks that it is very important to get Harry to Hogwarts. > > 2. Would a school official take any other child > shopping? The answer is "yes". Dumbledore offered this to Tom Riddle, but Tom refused. > 3. Tea with Hagrid. It looks in fact that Hagrid is > running his > own little club, just like Slughorn. Only the favours > he asks in > return are much more serious than a box of pineapple > sweets: > could you get rid of this illegal dragon for me, kids? > Could you > help me to prepare for the trial? Could you look after > my giant > brother? But is Hagrid a respectsperson? Surely not in the beginning, and this doesn't even change after he became a teacher. Therefore I don't think the other students really care either way about this, because being personally close to Hagrid is not the same as being personally close to more powerful and respectable teachers, like McGonagall. Also, it is said in OotP, that Parvati and Lavender visited Trelawney. Therefore a close student/teacher relationship doesn't seem completely unusual in Hogwarts. > > 4. Broomstick incident, of course. Instead of > punishment, Harry > is rewarded with his own broom and place on the team. But by McGonagall, who has her own personal interests. As already said, if it were Neville or Seamus she had seen flying, they would have gotten the place in the team. And if it were Snape and he had seen Goyle flying like this, Snape would have made sure Goyle got in the team and a good broomstick. Therefore I don't see this as any special example of special treatment for Harry or even Gryffindor house in general. And if Harry got some special treatment, than it wasn't because he's the "Boy who lived", but because he had shown some extraordinary talent. > > 5. Dumbledore finds Harry in front of the mirror - out > after > curfew, third night in the row, no punishment. This is of course pure speculation, since we mostly see Dumbledore through Harry's PoV, and therefore not interacting with other students alone. But I think given the special circumstances and what Harry saw in the mirror, Dumbledore would have done this to any student. I certainly would have hated the old man, if he had punished Harry for sneaking out. It was Harry's first chance to get a glance at his parents, after all. And Dumbledore told Harry not to search for the mirror again, and Harry listened. I'm not sure he would have done this, if Dumbledore had shown some extreme strictness. > 6. Dumbledore returns the cloak that was confiscated > after some > rule-breaking. I don't count the fact that he gave > Harry the cloak in the first place, that was indeed > just returning the > property, would've done it for any student. But "just > in case" > business? Teacher's pet. :-) Yeeees. I can definitely see your point here. But like in your previous point, the biggest difference between our opinions is that I think Dumbledore would have done something like this to every student. Though I'm not as sure as in the previous case. I agree about the end feast, though. Neville's my favourite character and I loved seeing him getting the glory, but it was definitely mean to make the Slytherins think they had won and then change everything in the last minute. > CoS: > > 7. McGonagall does not take points for flying car. If > Ron and > Harry consider themselves lucky, I won't argue with > them. Minerva > obviously cares about the House cup. But Harry did provide a good argument not to take points, eh? ;-) Not that I doubt any minute that Minerva was indeed very happy that she needn't to take points. However, as a contrast to this scene look at the one in PS, where Harry, Hermione, Neville and Draco are caught in the night out of her bedrooms. McGonagall took more points from the three Gryffindors (even from Neville, whom she knew just wanted to warn the others) than she did from Draco. This is not the deed of someone, who first and primarly cares for the House Cup or Gryffindor's glory. > > 8. Gryffindor's ghost conspires to get Harry out of > detention. Yes, but is a ghost a respectsperson? Anyway, I can see your point here, but it is IMO really a very insignificant incident. Does anyone besides Nick and Harry even know about this? > 10. Harry and Ron break emergency rules, walking the > corridors > without a teacher. But since they come up with a noble > story, > McGonagall does not punish them. McGonagall's an old softie. That's one of those cases where I think the person in question would have done that to everyone and it does not show any bias towards Gryffindor or Harry. > 12. Another Hogwarts official (who just happens to be > a Gryffindor) invites Harry for a cup of tea. That's an interesting one. Of course we know that Lupin has some evry personal and understandable reasons to do so, but I wonder what the students thought about this? And Lupin, at least before being exposed as a werewolf, is probably more of a respectsperson than Hagrid was. And at least in Hagrid's case the special friendship with Harry already started when Hagrid was a mere groundskeeper. That probably bothered the other students less than this one. > GoF: > > Letting Harry into the tournament is not exactly a > special treatment, as any student would have had to > compete under the binding magical contract. However, > taking his word that he didn't ask an older student to > put his name in, might well be. OT: But I always wondered if it really was that easy to fool the Goblet? And people talked about it as if it were very difficult. As if. You just have someone else throw your name into the goblet. On topc again: It is possible that Dumbledore used Legilimency here. > > 16. The Headmaster accepts Hogsmeade permission from > someone who is not Harry's parent or guardian, > nevermind being a convicted criminal at the time. While I can understand Dumbledore's reason here, I wonder how he explained this to McGonagall pre OotP. > 17. Hagrid shows Harry the dragons. Yes, but than, they thought Harry's life was in danger. Harry was not a simple Triwizard Champion. He was someone who participated due to circumstances beyond his control, and who theorized, that someone might use the Tournament to kill him. I think he was allowed to have any help available. > 18. Harry goes into Dumbledore's pensieve - no > punishment. At a time where Harry didn't knew what it was and what he did. Though a probably a simple "Don't do this again" wouldn't have been out of place. Maybe it would have made Harry not to climb into Snape's memory. > > Again - I know that saving the world is more important > than following the rules. But first of all other > characters are not privy to "saving the world" > context, Yes, but the question is, if they know about some of your examples. Do they for example know how many owls came to Privet Drive? And at the time, where Harry did his special lessons with Dumbledore, they already suspected that Harry was the "Chosen One". Therefore while they did not know anything in particular, they probably were able to put some clues together. I think it's no coincidence that this was the book, where Harry was most popular among the students. Hickengruendler From a_svirn at yahoo.com Fri Jan 6 00:28:35 2006 From: a_svirn at yahoo.com (a_svirn) Date: Fri, 06 Jan 2006 00:28:35 -0000 Subject: last minute points was Re: First potions lesson/Harry getting special treatment In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 145984 > Betsy Hp: > > So no, this explanation definitely doesn't work for me. The only > one that *does* work for me is the idea that Dumbledore is so darn > proud of Harry, and feels so darn guilty over the points lost with > the Norbert incident, he behaves rather foolishly and manages to > strengthen the House divisions at a time when he should be working > his ass off to bring the Houses together. (Frankly, I think this is > a place where Dumbledore is notoriously weak. He just does not know > how to bring rivals together. Canon is full of his failures.) As character references go this one is hardly any better than "the passive-aggressive cruel Dumbledore". Moreover, the two versions are not mutually exclusive. He may well be a cruel manipulative bastard with a special weakness for the Chosen One. a_svirn From a_svirn at yahoo.com Fri Jan 6 01:02:51 2006 From: a_svirn at yahoo.com (a_svirn) Date: Fri, 06 Jan 2006 01:02:51 -0000 Subject: Special treatment - yes or no In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 145985 >hickengruendler: > But by McGonagall, who has her own personal interests. As already > said, if it were Neville or Seamus she had seen flying, they would > have gotten the place in the team. And if it were Snape and he had > seen Goyle flying like this, Snape would have made sure Goyle got in > the team and a good broomstick. Therefore I don't see this as any > special example of special treatment for Harry or even Gryffindor > house in general. And if Harry got some special treatment, than it > wasn't because he's the "Boy who lived", but because he had shown > some extraordinary talent. a_svirn: I beg to differ. The school rules are bended specially for Harry ? normally first years are not allowed to the team. Wood ? surely an authority on the all things Quidditch ? said that Harry is the youngest player in a century. Yes, he's a natural, but so was his father, by all accounts, so was Charley, and no doubt any number of others. All of whom had simply to wait a year before they were allowed to participate in the tryouts. That's preferential treatment all right. >hickengruendler: > Yes, but is a ghost a respectsperson? a_svirn: Depends on the ghost. Bloody Baron certainly is. >hickengruendler: > Yes, but than, they thought Harry's life was in danger. Harry was not > a simple Triwizard Champion. He was someone who participated due to > circumstances beyond his control, and who theorized, that someone > might use the Tournament to kill him. I think he was allowed to have > any help available. a_svirn: That's just an excuse Hagrid was only too happy to use. They were all in the same boat with dragons. If Harry didn't warn Cedric it would have been his life threatened most. And what about showing dragons to Madame Maxime? Was Fleur also in some kind of mortal danger? From fuzz876i at yahoo.com Thu Jan 5 23:46:04 2006 From: fuzz876i at yahoo.com (fuzz876i) Date: Thu, 05 Jan 2006 23:46:04 -0000 Subject: Spinner's End Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 145986 Andie: > Who else has been visiting Snape that Wormtail has been > listening in on? > > And, when Snape returns to Hogwarts for the school year, > where does Wormatil go? Is he shipped off to another > DE, or back to LV? You raise a good question. While rereading the HBP for the fourth time I caught something else: Snape offered to tell Voldemort that Wormtail wanted more dangerous jobs because Wormtail didn't like having to wait on Snape but this chapter let us know that Snape really was still a death eater and not one of Dumbledore's men as thought. "fuzz876i" From Aisbelmon at hotmail.com Fri Jan 6 01:13:14 2006 From: Aisbelmon at hotmail.com (M.Clifford) Date: Fri, 06 Jan 2006 01:13:14 -0000 Subject: Special treatment - yes or no In-Reply-To: <20060105232956.29439.qmail@web86206.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 145987 Irene wrote: > PS: > > 1. Even before the Hogwarts starts - if it was any > other child, would the school be so insistent that he gets his > letter? Valky: Yes I think it would happen in another case. I think that the spell itself became more persistent to get its job done, or that it simply could not stop sending letters until Harry recieved one and read it. JKR tells us in interview that the hogwarts letters are automatic, so its unlikely tht conscious effort went into special treatment of Harry, here. Irene: > Generally speaking, can muggle parents ever refuse for > a child to go? Valky But they aren't his parents, and they weren't simply refusing him to let him go. This doesn't apply, really because Harry's parents wanted him to go to Hogwarts. The issue here is that Petunia disrespected her sisters wishes for her child, the issue is between Petunia and Lily, should Harry suffer for that? The argument that the Dursleys were parents exercising a fair right reassigns Lily and her wishes to nobody and nothing. Irene: > 2. Would a school official take any other child > shopping? Yes, Dumbledore offered to take Tom shopping but Tom refused. > Irene: > 3. Tea with Hagrid. It looks in fact that Hagrid is running his > own little club, just like Slughorn. Only the favours he asks in > return are much more serious than a box of pineapple sweets: > could you get rid of this illegal dragon for me, kids? > Could you help me to prepare for the trial? Could you look after > my giant brother? Valky: That's another argument that reassigns truth to nothing. Hagrid is a lonely outcast, how does his emotional needs for companionship become some ploy of extra privilege. It's not like other students were likely to take him up on his offer of tea. > Irene: > 4. Broomstick incident, of course. Instead of punishment, Harry > is rewarded with his own broom and place on the team. Valky: Bingo! It's wierd, but I don't think this one has anything to do with it being Harry. IMO This one is definitely evidence of what MacGonagall was willing to do in her competitive rivalry with Snape. If it had been Neville or Seamus, she would have found a way to bypass the rules, she wanted to win. I agree that this was favouritism but I think there is some evidence of Harry just getting lucky in being the one who recieves it. > Irene: > 5. Dumbledore finds Harry in front of the mirror - out after > curfew, third night in the row, no punishment. Valky: Draco points a wand at Dumbledore's heart and Dumbledore tries to save Draco's life in return. Tom Riddle is out of bed looking at the person he murdered, Dumbledore suspects the foul play has something to do with Tom, but is kindly and gentle in his approach anyway. A roomful of Aurors has to attack Dumbledore in unison before he dishes out anything that even resembles punishment. The reason to this one is Dumbledore, not Harry. Irene: > 6. Dumbledore returns the cloak that was confiscated after some > rule-breaking. I don't count the fact that he gave Harry the cloak > in the first place, that was indeed just returning the > property, would've done it for any student. But "just > in case" business? Teacher's pet. :-) Valky: Aren't we later told that Dumbledore alone knew the danger Harry was in all his life. In HBP we're finally shown that Dumbledore expects Harry to use the Cloak for his protection. This is not favouritism, this is a measure of practicality, while Harry has the invisibility cloak he is equipped with protection that Dumbledore knows he needs. > > CoS: > > 7. McGonagall does not take points for flying car. If Ron and > Harry consider themselves lucky, I won't argue with them. Minerva > obviously cares about the House cup. Valky: Bingo. MacGonagall definitely cares about her rivalry with Snape for the House Cup, but she also does draw a line in the sand that she will not cross to gain or retain them, ie she took 150 points from Gryffindor for the Norbert incident. If House Points were right to be taken MacGonagall will have taken them, perhaps she didn't because the crime happened essentially outside Hogwarts. > Irene: > 8. Gryffindor's ghost conspires to get Harry out of > detention. Valky: And he invites Harry to his 400th deathday party, and he tells Harry in HBP that other ghosts gather around him to hear his stories of Harry Potter. Yes, Nick is a fan of Harry's, no question. > Irene: > 9. Harry lies about finding Mrs. Norris. Dumbledore seems to know > it (a bit of legilimency), but lets him to get away > with it. Valky: So what, he has done the same to Tom Riddle in the past, Bertha Jorkins, Slughorn. Everyone who lies to Dumbledore gets a chance to tell the truth without pressure, it's enough for Dumbledore to know that the person lied to him. > Irene: > 10. Harry and Ron break emergency rules, walking the corridors > without a teacher. But since they come up with a noble story, > McGonagall does not punish them. Valky: Does this happen after Hermione is petrified or/and Ginny is captured? Because if it does, can you really fault MacGonagall for her compassion toward those who are suffering in these circumstances. > Irene: > PoA: > > 11. Fudge gives Harry some serious celebrity > treatment. Valky: Fudge. *rolls eyes* No comment. > Irene: > 12. Another Hogwarts official (who just happens to be > a Gryffindor) invites Harry for a cup of tea. Valky: You mean Lupin? He's virtually an Uncle, I don't see the problem. > Irene: > 13. Madame Hooch is asked to supervise the trainings, > because McGonagall doesn't want to reduce team's > chances of winning. Valky: LOL this is MacGonagall's love of Gryffindor winning again, there's plenty of evidence of it. I think also that the trainings are asked to be supervised by a teacher because WW official intelligence says that someone is trying to *kill Harry*. Hogwarts would be as protective of any other student who was targeted for murder, for example the muggleborns in COS. > Irene: > 14. That's a big one: the very same Professor, who > just happens to be a Gryffindor, covers a huge > rule-breaking episode (never mind madly > security-breaking), and Harry gets off without any > punishment. Valky: Hmm well that Professor obviously has some confusion going on about his own guilt. Harry followed Lupin's *own* directions (Marauders Map) in this major case of rule-breaking, and Lupin wasn't telling Dumbledore about any of the whole she-bang of these rule-breaking dirty little secrets he was keeping. Lupin wasn't playing favourites, he was confused and disorientated and long term traumatised by the death of his friends by a traitor who was also his friend, and still trying to decide the right course of action to deal with all of it. > Irene: > 15. Out of bounds, after curfew, nearly got Ron > killed, but nevermind - the Headmaster has a special > task for Harry and Hermione. Valky: Again, it's Dumbledore. Snape wanted them punished, naturally, but he also wanted the sadistic pleasure of watching Lupin and Sirius have their souls sucked out, so lets not rely too heavily on *his* moral compass there. Dumbledore just is this way. Remember the big picture, Draco and his father had a good Hippogryff sentenced to death out of pure spite for Hagrid and Dumbledore, Sirius was innocent and was about to get his soul sucked. Again Dumbledore is not playing favourites, he is just measuring a practicality. > > GoF: > > Letting Harry into the tournament is not exactly a > special treatment, as any student would have had to > compete under the binding magical contract. However, > taking his word that he didn't ask an older student to > put his name in, might well be. Valky: Dumbledore didn't detect a lie this time. To say that it doesn't matter that he could detect Harry lying is a double standard on the case in COS. > Irene: > 16. The Headmaster accepts Hogsmeade permission from > someone who is not Harry's parent or guardian, > nevermind being a convicted criminal at the time. Valky: Technically he is the appointed Guardian by Harry's parents request. James and Lily have had their wishes disrespected enough by now don't you think. > > 17. Hagrid shows Harry the dragons. Valky: And he shows Olympe, and Karkaroff shows Krum. I vaguely recall somebody saying cheating was a tradition in the Triwizard. > Irene: > 18. Harry goes into Dumbledore's pensieve - no > punishment. Valky: Dumbledore! > Irene: > OoTP: > > 19. Would the school try to get any of the students > acquitted in a stitch-up trial like this? Probably > yes. Would they go to such lengths, up to producing > false witnesses? Probably not. Valky: Why not. If the Ministry was doing the same, then yes Dumbledore would do anything to protect his student from the Kangaroo Court Justice. > Irene: > HBP: > > I can't be bothered to go through the details in this > one, Dumbledore has practically adopted Harry in this > book. Valky: Huh? So it doesn't matter that Harry's protection runs out the next year and he faces certain death? Why do you think Dumbledore wouldn't have done this for Cedric had he known that Cedric was to face Voldemort too? Dumbledore would do this for anyone. Take Draco for example if you need, he quite literally offers to adopt Draco's whole family to protect him. Valky From h2so3f at yahoo.com Fri Jan 6 01:20:31 2006 From: h2so3f at yahoo.com (h2so3f) Date: Fri, 06 Jan 2006 01:20:31 -0000 Subject: The Dursleys In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 145988 Andie wrote: " Who says Harry has to stay at the Dursley's until the 31st? All Harry has to do is spend 1 night at Privet Dr for the protection to be in place. Harry doesn't have the time to hang around the Dursley's until the end of July. He has hunting to do and a wedding to go to." CH3ed: While it is true that Harry needs to just spend a night at the Dursley to ensure that the protection is extended until his 17th birthday, the protection is only effective at the Dursley House. I don't have the book at the moment but as I recall DD said 'while Harry can call the place where his mother's blood (Petunia) dwells his home, THERE he cannot be harmed by LV.' So if Harry isn't going to hole up at the Dursley's until his protection runs out, then he might as well not go back there at all (but he will because DD told him to). The conditions of the protection; tho, has me wondered that if LV knew of the terms, why hasn't he tried to assassinate Petunia? If she goes, then so should go Harry's protection at the Dursley House. Without a living blood relative of Lily to reside with Harry hasn't got that protection. Tho there may be other protections yet that DD conjured up but hadn't told Harry (and us) yet. CH3ed :O) From kchuplis at alltel.net Fri Jan 6 00:29:42 2006 From: kchuplis at alltel.net (kchuplis) Date: Fri, 06 Jan 2006 00:29:42 -0000 Subject: Ginny in HBP and a little SHIP Harry/Ginny WAS: Re: First potions lesson In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 145989 > Magpie: > > Actually, > I tend to participate in fandoms where when I have something to work > out. If I'm just happy with a book there's less to say for me. I just find that if a book I'm reading disturbs me enough to drop it, I'm probably not going to be following it very long. We definitely approach things differently. > Magpie: > > I wish I was you in thinking that little connector was > particularly well done. It was a serious eye-roller for me. It would have been an eyeroller if Harry had had a single clue at the moment it happened what it meant. He was, however, completely oblivious. > > Magpie: > > Well, it's commented on in the text (Oh, is that why she's > different? Because she talks now? ) so I don't think I have to > prove it was there. That's it? "Oh, is that why she's different? (clarification) Because she talks now?" I just don't see that as a huge change in personality. It's certainly explained. And well, I know that I didn't act the same at 13 or 14 as I did at 9,10,11 years old. In fact, I clearly remember my mother telling me I was the perfect child until I turned 14. When I asked her what she meant, she told me I had begun questioning things, arguing and generally, well, forming my own opinions. A little thing called hormones and growth I suppose, but like Ginny and millions of other kids at that age, we suddenly develop in many ways. >Her speech pattern changes significantly > between her last appearance in GoF and her first appearance in > OotP. I've written more extensively about those two scenes > comparing the two and breaking it down line by line to show the > different personality put across in the two scenes, but I don't > think this is the place for that. Why not? Just point me to it if it was in another thread. This is a forum to discuss the novels of JKR, which would include character development and the authors techniques in presenting that. I think it's the perfect place for it. How does her speech change? Other than that she has 4 years of school, learning, exposure to other students and teachers. I mean, you make it sound as though she has suddenly changed from using the queen's English to gang slang. What changed? >Suffice to say I could tell from > her very first line in OotP that Ginny's going to be different in > this book and was not wrong--and since this is confirmed within the > text by Harry noticing she seems different again, she's older, she's no longer obsessed by a crush, she talks. She's being natural around Harry after having spent summers in his presence. This is wierd how? >and fandom discussing it > and the author afaik confirming that yes, she's not shy around him > any more so now he's seeing the "real her" for the first time I see > no reason to not accept that the change isn't there, But how is that odd? How does this cause the comments I've seen? It seems like natural growth and development to me. I'd really appreaciate some examples of it being out of place or reason to cause the threads I've seen. >that the author > didn't do it on purpose. It's called character development. I'm afraid I wouldn't think much of characters that didn't go somewhere. >I just can't reconcile the two > characters. In fact, when people reconcile them for me they often > seem to go against what the author seems to be admittedly going for > and suggest the reasons for the change. Rowling says the hint is > Ron saying Ginny "never shuts up" in CoS, but HBP Ginny isn't a > chatterbox either. She rarely speaks more than she needs to. Still not seeing it. She's not shy in the later books with a witty or barbed comment. Ron's "never shuts up" comment not withstanding, I'm sure he didn't mean she literally never shut up. > > Basically, imagine if in the next book Neville suddenly developed > Zach Smith's personality. That's what reading OotP is like for me > with Ginny. Because she talks to Harry and he noticed it? It's as though she became Lavender Brown? Errr. Not seeing it. Please provide some scenes where she acts completely different as to be two different personalities entirely. >I understand that she's supposed to be the same girl > and I accept it because to do otherwise is to pointlessly fight it, > but this particular trick in canon doesn't work for me at all and I > figure I might as well say that. Cool. Please provide some canon showing this angle of thought. kchuplis Betsy Hp: > Speaking for myself, I ain't reading it for the romance. > Frankly, I think JKR places very little importance on the romance > aspect of the story and when she writes about it, prefers to do so > in a comedic way. (The Bill/Fluer and Ron/Lavender romances were > much more realistic and interesting to my mind, and they read like > they'd been written more naturally, IMO.) kchuplis: Interesting, because if there was one relationship presented so far that seemed forced it was the Ron/Lavender one. I know, delierate but extremely annoying and carried maybe a tad far ('Won-Won' was, just a little much for me.) But I totally agree that the romance is not the point but the relationships are, and that's why I wanted to pursue understanding people in this (what seems like) big hue and cry about Ginny. >Now I do think > this particular version of *Ginny* came out of nowhere. So while I > enjoyed their first kiss I didn't much enjoy Ginny. A bit too > spunky, sparkley, "pretty little princess in combat boots" for me. > Well, that's just not caring for that personality. My question is why is it a version 1 of Ginny and version 2 and what is the canon that supports that? > Betsy Hp: > Oh, yeah, Ginny is superfun! Life of the party! Soul of the > quidditch team! Righter of wrongs! Scurge of that ass-hat, Zach > Smith! (Damn him and his questions!) Favorite of Slughorn! Darling > of the twins! And just to cement her super-cool status -- itty > bitty sister from hell to Ron. This just sounds, again, like you just don't like that personality. That's fine. I actually didn't see her as quite that er.....caricaturized, but OK. She just seems definitely Weasleyish to me. I mean, Fred and George weren't shrinking flowers, Percy is as big a prat as they are goofs. All of them seem to have strong opinions. None of them are stupid (actually, Ron seems to have the least grey matter of all the Weasley's. Poor kid.) Not one of them doesn't seem to have a pretty sharp mouth. OK, she isn't a dweeb. Did we expect her to be? That's my question. Where are the assertions that Ginny is "changed"? > Betsy Hp: > A flaw or two might have been nice. An acknowledged flaw, anyway. She's lippy. That's probably a flaw in many ways. We don't see her enough in classes to know how teachers perceive her. (Which is completely understandable since the books are from Harry's POV and she is a year younger). She's certainly presented as being slightly flirty after puberty. > She does have an enormous chip on her shoulder and can go from quiet > to raging fury in sixty seconds, but I get the sense that's supposed > to be a plus in JKR's eyes. Well, again, it seems to be a Weasley trait. We've seen Ron do it a million times. But somehow that's wrong in Ginny? Personally, it's more of a "typical redhead" characerization. And quite honestly, every since I hit puberty, I have been known, myself to go go from calm to fury in seconds. Not sure about the chip on her shoulder. About what? Where do you see this described? Well, other than with Ron. I don't know about you, but if MY brother called me "loose" in front of both my boyfriend and close family friend (who I really did once harbor a crush on and probably still has quite a standing in my eyes even if I am not pursuing that) I'd probably put his eye out and I wouldn't forgive it easily. It doesn't seem glorified to me, just .... well realistic. Was she supposed to pat Ron on the head? I guess the other spot is the quidditch field. Well, *I* agreed with her. McLaggen *was* being a prat. >(If it's a left over Voldemort piece > and it turns out her personality changes were from her brush with a > horcrux I will take everything I said about her and JKR's handling > of her back. I will also be thrilled beyond measure. But I fear > this will not happen.) (shudder. I certainly hope not.) > Betsy Hp: > She goes from ho-hum about quidditch in GoF to super quidditch > genius. She goes from amused from afar by the twins to more twin > than the twins. And she goes from loving Ron to hating him. I've > catalogued all this before here: > Eh, I still don't see it. We didn't really see enough of her to know *what* she was about quidditch. As far as loving Ron to hating him, see the above. Man, I must have grown up completely strange. I developed new interests, my own independence, had raging arguments with my siblings (still do, well, to a point, I live far away from them now) but still love them and this all got worse when, what do you know, I turned 14. (My mom was right, I wasn't nearly as obnoxious previously). > I know not everyone agrees that Ginny was handled badly, but those > of who do think she was aren't basing it on nothing. I'd still like to see some real canon presented on the matter. The arguments when you hit OoTP in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/144816 seem largely based on perception and not what was literally written. You *wanted* to see something different with Ginny but IMO what was presented was not odd, or bad writing or out of step with a develping personality. Those are two different things. Because she was laughing at Bill and Charlie instead of cheering? I just don't see this being a huge difference. Laughing/cheering not seeing a big difference here. So Ginny doesn't push her way into quidditch talk....she's two years younger, she may not have fully developed her interest in it yet. I'm certain those two summers between where she was able to join in playing caused a difference. Two years ago, I didn't know much about horse racing and now I hold my own in fantasy contests with seasoned handicappers. I learned. Sorry guys, but so far, I'm not seeing canon supported arguments from anyone on a bad case of character development on the part of JKR with Ginny Weasley. Guess I'm just being dim. kchuplis From kelleyaynn at yahoo.com Fri Jan 6 01:03:40 2006 From: kelleyaynn at yahoo.com (kelleyaynn) Date: Fri, 06 Jan 2006 01:03:40 -0000 Subject: Harry and Ginny In-Reply-To: <26e.3a54d84.30ee906f@aol.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 145990 Danielle: > I'm not sure if I caught that example after class about the smell when Ginny > comes up, but I noticed right off the bat when they got on the train that > Harry was feeling out of sorts when Ginny left him to go be with Dean. Of course Kelleyaynn: I too noticed his reaction on the train. His feelings for Ginny were confirmed in my mind when he smelled the amortentia potion and then met up with her after class. After the summer at the Burrow, where he had the chance to really get to know her (especially since she was now acting like herself) it makes perfect sense to me that he could start really noticing her even though she was nothing more than Ron's little sister before. Actually, I think he notices her rather often in the previous books, given that they are written in Harry's POV and she is mentioned here and there throughout. He isn't thinking about her in any romantic sort of way, but there is obviously something that brings her to his attention when it isn't necessary for plot development. Danielle: I think that if > there is no school at Hogwarts book 7, then Ginny's comming with them. I > think Ginny has enough tact not to argue with Harry at DD funeral. But if she > can she will come, because she doesn't want to be left out and in her mind she > would be safer with Harry then away from Harry. But that of course depends on > mama Weasley too. Kelleyaynn: I'm sure that the break up at Dumbledore's funeral is not the last we will see of Harry/Ginny until he defeats Voldemort. The build up in HBP was too significant for it to disappear for what will probably be nearly the entire book, only to have him come back to her at the end. I think JKR has hinted in other ways that she is important is some way to the ending of the story. Physically Ginny is remarkably similar to Lily, her status as the seventh child, and the first girl in (I think) seven generations of Weasleys I'm sure is not just a throwaway point. Ginny is also too stubborn and independent to just accept Harry's decision (which while well meaning, is pointless since he still cares for her, is hopeless at occlumency, everyone at Hogwarts already knew about the two of them, and her family is target anyway) meekly. I don't think she will end up going with the trio, however, even if Hogwarts does not open. She is underage, and her presence would only distract Harry, possibly at a critical moment if he is worried about her safety. I'm not sure how she will be woven into the story, but I'm sure she will be, in significant ways. Kelleyaynn From Aisbelmon at hotmail.com Fri Jan 6 01:48:04 2006 From: Aisbelmon at hotmail.com (M.Clifford) Date: Fri, 06 Jan 2006 01:48:04 -0000 Subject: last minute points was Re: First potions lesson/Harry getting special treatment In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 145991 > > >>Valky: > > > > It looked as though Dumbledore was punishing Slytherin House, > > because he *was*, in a sense. > > > > Basically I think the point is that Harry and Co had done them all > > (DD and Hogwarts including Slytherin) a favour because his actions > > had enabled Dumbledore the means to demonstrate the true meaning > > of House virtue to the school. > > Betsy Hp: > Oh, ick! I really, really, hope not. Because if this were the case > (and I agree with Magpie that you're building off of a lot of > assumptions here, Valky) Valky: LOL! You and me both, then because I see your argument building off the assumption that the Slytherins *deserved* that win in PS/SS which would in turn assume that they worked hard to legally and rightfully gain every single point awarded them and we know unequivocally that they didn't. Gryffindor lost 150 points that was rightfully earned because Draco deliberately schemed to ensure that they did lose those points. We can agree to disagree on this point but I think the trio did the right thing to break the rules to protect Norbert, the thing Dumbledore would have done except that they never asked him to. The House cup is about House *virtue*, Harry and Ron were showing the virtuous qualities of their house that night, and Draco was showing the negative side of his house. Yet Slytherin ending up winning as a result. If it was wrong for Dumbledore to publicly demonstrate the virtuous way to win the cup, then sign me up for "wrong". Valky From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Fri Jan 6 02:24:01 2006 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Fri, 06 Jan 2006 02:24:01 -0000 Subject: Special treatment - yes or no/ a bit of Draco POV about Harry again/Nprbert In-Reply-To: <20060105232956.29439.qmail@web86206.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 145992 Irene Mikhlin wrote: > You don't need to refute it with the claims that Harry > is a nice > kid who didn't ask for special treatment, but deserves > it all > anyway. Alla: OK, I will just address a few, since other people already said a lot what I agree with (especially Valky - thank you), but I want to rephrase this sentence of yours. I think that in the HUGE majority of those instances special treatment is given to Harry NOT because he is a nice kid who did not ask for special treatment, but deserves it, (although I do think he is a nice kid of course), BUT because he NEEDS it (IMO there is a difference between NEEDS and DESERVES) and also IMO need to help the kid stay alive, since somebody is constantly after his life, IS an absolute justification to give him special treatment sometimes. Especially since we saw that if needed such special treatment is given to anybody in Hogwarts, so I don't think it is really special treatment. But as people said Dumbledore gave such special treatment to the boy who planned his assassination, and treated him especially to such extent that he ignored that in the meantime he nearly killed two other students, so I think it is very reasonable to help Harry stay alive. IMO of course. Irene: > 14. That's a big one: the very same Professor, who > just happens to be a Gryffindor, covers a huge > rule-breaking episode (never mind madly > security-breaking), and Harry gets off without any > punishment. Alla: I completely disagree. Harry indeed got off without "Snape style" punishment, IMO. And I so loved Remus for coming just on time. Remus punished Harry and punished him VERY effectively IMO. So what if it was just a lecture? It WORKED on Harry and that is what matters IMO. Punishment should help student to recognize that his behavior was wrong and not to do it again, punishment should not needlessly embarrass student, making him be afraid for the life of his pet or being humiliated in front of his peers (and yeah, before you ask, I will say it again - that Mcgonagall did that to Neville was WRONG, very WRONG) Irene: > Letting Harry into the tournament is not exactly a > special treatment, as any student would have had to > compete under the binding magical contract. However, > taking his word that he didn't ask an older student to > put his name in, might well be. Alla: I am glad we agree that being forced to compete in something is not special treatment, but what do you mean " taking his word for'? What would you suggest Dumbledore to do? Use Veritaserum on Harry or something like that? it may not be even legal to use on children, IMO. Irene: > 16. The Headmaster accepts Hogsmeade permission from > someone who is not Harry's parent or guardian, > nevermind being a convicted criminal at the time. Alla: Erm... Yes, he is a guardian IMO. The one which Lily and James would want. Since Albus now knows that he is innocent, why shouldn't he accept the form? Irene: > Again - I know that saving the world is more important > than following the rules. But first of all other > characters are not privy to "saving the world" > context, and some of the cases above have nothing to > do with it. Alla: Honestly, I think that huge majority of those cases DOES have to do with either saving the world or saving Harry from the madman and I see no proof in the books that DD would not have gone to such great lengths to any other students. IMO of course As to other characters not being privy too, well, yes, of course, but that is why I keep insisting that for example even though Draco may not know downsides of Harry's fame, (although I think even he is aware that Harry's parents got killed and Harry was left with being a Chosen One,) and may think of Harry' situation as one which is a lot of fun to be with, it is quite easy to see that he is wrong. Because Harry's celebrity status is mainly negative one IMO and while Draco may think that it is cool to be in the newspaper,etc, there is no escape from FACT ( IMO of course) that Harry is a celebrity because he is marked either for death or for killing someone ( well, we don't know how that will play out of course, but that is how the situation stands right now, right? - to kill or be killed) and I honestly don't see ANY reason to wish for being in Harry's skin. It is objective, no? Harry may die at any time basically. If Draco would realise it, would he REALLY envy Harry? Now, if Draco would envy Harry being rich, THAT I could objectively understand, I suppose. I mean, Harry being rich has nothing to do with the fact that Harry is trying to escape death every day, IMO and even if Harry does not enjoy money, I can understand that having money could be nice, I suppose. But Draco is rich himself, so I doubt that he envies Harry in that aspect, I think he envies Harry celebrity status and in that I think he is completely wrong. I am not even saying that being celebrity does not have its perks, but IMO "Harry as a celebrity" is a situation which every normal person would not want to be in, unless such person has a death wish of course. Valky: I think the trio did the right thing to break the rules to protect > Norbert, the thing Dumbledore would have done except that they never > asked him to. Alla: Yes, I agree and consider a nice contrast of what Ron does for Norbert, who bites him and what Draco does for Buckbeak in PoA. I love Ron, had I mentioned it recently? :-) JMO of course, Alla From Nanagose at aol.com Fri Jan 6 02:38:25 2006 From: Nanagose at aol.com (spotsgal) Date: Fri, 06 Jan 2006 02:38:25 -0000 Subject: Real child abuse/ESE!lupin questions In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 145993 > > > Pippin: > > > The existence of an unidentified Death Eater who "sent" the > > > Lestranges to attack the Longbottoms per JKR's website. > > > Bella would not take orders from Snape or Peter. JKR says all > > > the major characters have been introduced. So who was it? > > > > Alla: > > Oh, I am sure that we will know the person. My money is on Snape > > of course. Christina: I'd also bring up the possibility of Lucius Malfoy. Just a thought. >> Amiable Dorsai: >> And what a powerfully useful addition to Voldemort's ranks Remus >> must be! Imagine having the cool nerve, the incredible aim, and the >> split second timing needed to hex Sirius from a distance--with a >> spell that leaves a visible trail between the caster and the >> target--in front of Harry, Neville, Dumbledore and Kingsley, (I >> think that completes the list of good guys, saving Sirius himself, >> who were conscious at the time) and not have any of them notice! >> Wandlessly! > Pippin: > I think you will find that Dumbledore was looking away, Kingsley > was behind the dais, and Harry and Neville were behind Lupin. Christina: Sirius's death scene is *very* hard to block out, just because it is a fast-action battle scene with many players, in which Harry is not paying much attention. Yes, Dumbledore was looking away, but Kingsley's position isn't really specified. His last mention before Sirius's death is a couple of pages back, and the next we hear of him is here: (OotP, Scholastic, page 808) "Behind the dais there was still flashes of light, grunts, and cries -- Kingsley had run forward to continue Sirius's duel with Bellatrix." (end quote) It's unclear whether Kingsley had been behind the dais the entire time, or what. Bellatrix was obviously standing in front of it when she was dueling with Sirius, so she must have moved to the back. The language sounds more like Kingsley approached Bellatrix than the other way around, so I would figure that Bella was running behind the dais with the intention of running out of the room and escaping. Kingsley, seeing this, ran behind the dais also to engage her. So, while Kingsley could have been behind the dais the entire time, we really don't know his exact position. Now, Harry and Neville. Saying that they were behind Lupin isn't entirely accurate. They were actually *above* him, which makes a huge difference in how they would have witnessed the spell that knocked Sirius into the veil. Here is the canon description for the room: (OotP, Scholastic, page 773) "...the center of it was sunken, forming a great stone pit some twenty feet below them....stone benches running all around the room and descending in steep steps like an amphitheater...there was a raised stone dais in the center of the lowered floor....Harry scrambled down the benches....The pointed archway looked much taller from where he stood now than when he had been looking down at it from above." (end quote) Now, Harry and Neville are somewhere on the raised benches when Sirius falls through the veil (Dumbledore rushes past them on his way down to the middle of the room). The highest up that Harry could be is about twenty feet. Judging from how long it took Harry to get to the bottom of the room and the way his breath was coming "in searing gasps (p. 806)," I think it's safe to say that Harry was more than a step or two from the bottom of the room. Lupin is standing on the floor, below the dais. Harry saw the scene from above both Lupin and Sirius. Lupin's exact position isn't specified, but nothing is mentioned about him running up to meet Harry as Harry ran to the dais, which suggests that Harry ran *past* Lupin to get there, meaning that Lupin should have been in Harry's line of sight from the benches (although it wouldn't really even matter if Lupin wasn't in Harry's direct line of sight or not, which I'll get to in a second). The narrative states that Sirius ducks out of the way of "Bellatrix's jet of red light (p. 805)." A lot of hay has been made about the fact that the origin of the second jet of light is not specified. However, Harry can obviously see enough of Bella and Sirius to know that the *first* jet of light was from her wand. If Lupin was the origin of the second jet of light, wouldn't Harry have noticed a difference? After all, Bellatrix is standing above Lupin, and if Lupin wanted to cast a spell with his wand covertly, he would have to be holding it at his side. The trajectory of a spell coming from Lupin would have been so different from one coming from Bella that Harry should have noticed this difference immediately. Not to mention the fact that Harry has the advantage of height, meaning that there wasn't anything that should have blocked his view of the jet of light. > Pippin: > Sirius calls out to Harry to take the prophecy and run. If he saw > it in Harry's hand, what need to tell him to take it? But if not, > how would he think that Harry knew what he was talking about? Snape > and Dumbledore know that Harry hasn't a clue what the prophecy > is or how to recognize it. The Death Eaters don't know that. > According to Lucius, they assumed that Dumbledore would have > told Harry all about it. So who could have conveyed that assumption > to Sirius? Only a Death Eater -- and not Snape. Christina: This is an interesting point, so I'll try to address it. I think what you are saying is that perhaps Lupin made Sirius think that Harry knew more about the prophecy than he actually did. Well, we have canon that Sirius was in contact with Dumbledore throughout GoF and OotP, updating Dumbledore on matters concerning Harry. We also know that Sirius is well aware that Dumbledore does not want Harry to know a whole lot about what's going on (and Sirius does keep his mouth shut at critical junctures). So I hesitate to think that, prior to arriving in the DoM, Sirius had incorrect notions of how much Harry knew about the prophecy. Also, if Lupin had mentioned something that contradicted what Dumbledore had said, I think Sirius would have noticed and found it odd. Okay, so that leaves your very good question about why Sirius said what he said. First, there's always the possibility that JKR didn't give that much thought to Sirius's comment and that we're reading too much into it. Next, there's the possiblity that Sirius wasn't thinking too much at the time and blurted out "Take the prophecy" because it was shorter to say than "Take that cloudly glass round thing." There's also the possiblity that Sirius just figured that Harry knew what the glass ball was from the fact that Harry & Co. had been fighting with the Death Eaters about it. Sirius might have just assumed that the subject of what the glass ball was had come up before he got there. Also, we know that sound carries in the DoM. Harry and Hermione can hear Malfoy and the other Death Eaters talking through a door (Harry puts his ear close, but Hermione doesn't and she can still hear what is said). My point is, no more than 10 seconds before the Order enters the battle, Bellatrix says, "Now, Potter, either give us the prophecy, or watch your little friend die the hard way! (p. 801)" Given that the "Veil room" is particularly good at carrying sound (I think Harry mentions sounds echoing in the room), I think it would be reasonable to theorize that the Order members heard Bella's words right before they entered the fight. > > Alla: > > > > Such as this one - Lupin also suspected that Sirius was a spy, > > right? Do you categorize Sirius as one of DE also? > Pippin: > I don't see the relevance. If Lupin was mistaken about Sirius, does > that somehow imply that Sirius was mistaken about Lupin? Christina: No, it doesn't. But I think what Alla is trying to say (and I agree with her here) is that Sirius suspecting Lupin isn't very good evidence that Lupin is ESE. Alla was providing an instance where one character suspected another of being ESE and was wrong (something that, IIRC, happens a few times in the series). So, saying that Sirius's suspicions of Lupin is evidence of ESE!Lupin is kind of like saying that Lupin and Dumbledore's suspicions of Sirius can be used as evidence for ESE!Sirius. > Pippin: > Lupin has always been susceptible to pressure from his peer > group. He now sees the werewolves as his peers, his fellows and > equals, and they have a common enemy in Umbridge. The > werewolves are mostly on Voldemort's side. So there would > be pressure on Lupin to go along, and if his conscience complained > about it, he has a long history of not listening. Christina: I think you're making a bit of a leap here. We know that Lupin is susceptible to pressure from his *friends*. In talking about Lupin's tendency to go along with other people (keeping his own concerns quiet), JKR has said that this trait comes from Lupin's desire to be liked. I would actually argue that much of Lupin's "cutting his friends slack" has disappeared between the pensieve scene of OotP and Lupin's current adult self (we see him physically and verbally restraining Sirius MANY times over the course of the series). I think this was more of a problem for Lupin when he was younger. Now that he is part of the new Order, there are many people that keep company with him (Tonks, Molly, Arthur, Dumbledore). The rest of the Order members seem to get along with him, and when going to pick up Harry at Privet Drive, the Advance Guard allows Lupin to take a fair bit of charge. As a kid, Lupin lets his three friends get away with whatever they want because he if he nags them about their habits, they might shun him from the group. Then Lupin wouldn't have any friends at all. But many members of the WW have been kind and friendly to Lupin during the series, and so he should feel no "need" to cut his fellow werewolves slack. Why does he care if they approve of him? He does not need their friendship. Also, even when Lupin was a child, his conscience *still* never rested easy. Note that he lets the pensieve scene happen, but he does NOT join in. His conscience lets him sit there as long as he is taking no active part. But your vision of ESE!Lupin has him taking a *very* active role, going as far as murder. Secondly, we also know that on top of not joining in, Lupin *did* make his objections somewhat known. Sirius says that Lupin made him and James feel "ashamed of themselves" from time to time, meaning that Lupin did bring up his concerns at least occasionally. Can you imagine Lupin gently prodding Voldemort about *his* bad deeds? Yikes! Of course, you are assuming that Lupin actually *has* a conscience and is going along with the DE's because of peer pressure or his identity as a werewolf. You could also claim that Lupin doesn't really have a conscience at all, but then you can't use Lupin's passivity in dealing with his friends (which you generalize to peers) as evidence for ESE. I'm going to step back for a second and mention one more thing here, because your comment really hit on one of my biggest personal objections to ESE!Lupin. One of JKR's primary themes in the series is discrimination and prejudice. Throughout his life, people are afraid of Lupin and suspect him of wrongdoing *solely* because he is a werewolf. We do not know exactly why Sirius thought Lupin was a spy, but I'll bet that your exact line of thinking was going through the back of his head ("All the werewolves are turning to Voldemort, Remus has been so good at keeping secrets from people in the past, etc"). We know that most werewolves really *are* turning to Voldemort, and we've met Fenrir Greyback, who I'd argue is the epitome of werewolfish evil, and Lupin's foil. What would it say if Lupin ultimately *did* end up being evil? The public was right all along! Werewolves really *can't* be trusted; they are inherently Dark and can follow no path but one of evil. I always cringe when matters of theme come up, but I think that ESE!Lupin would seriously undermine a huge part of what JKR is trying to say. It's all over the books. Hagrid (and his brother) show us that not *all* giants are bad, Sirius shows us that not *all* purebloods (and Blacks) are evil, Dobby shows us that not *all* house elves like being enslaved. By the same token, so much attention has been called to the horrible discrimination that faces werewolves, that I'd be shocked if we were left at the end of the series with every last werewolf being evil. Those are just my own personal feelings though, but I do feel like they make some sense. To quickly address a couple of your other points: Pippin: > Peter's stellar incompetence as a spy Christina: Not sure where you're going with this one, but we *know* that Peter is a spy. We've seen him in DE mode, and he's admitted to it. Also, I wouldn't say that Peter is as generally incompetent as people like to think he is (many fans, and James and Sirius). He is competent enough to bring Voldemort back to life without messing things up. And he is *extremely* competent as a *spy* - the man can turn into a rat! Pippin: > his grievance against Umbridge Christina: Basically all the good guys we know have grievances with Umbridge. Pippin: > his attempt to kill Peter in cold blood Christina: I'm not sure how you mean this. Are you referring to the fact that Lupin was able and willing to kill another human being? If you are, well then so was Sirius, and we're not calling him ESE. Also, if Lupin were ESE, I'd argue that he'd have less of a reason to want to kill Peter. Pippin: >Fenrir Greyback's ability to predict the time of his transformations >well enough that he can position himself to attack specific victims >(HBP ch 16) Christina: Well, anybody that wants to figure out when a werewolf will transform can- it's at moonrise. All werewolves have the ability to know when they will transform. That doesn't mean that all of them will use it to evil ends. Again, this goes back to the idea that all werewolves aren't evil simply because they can be. Pippin: >His ability to tell what Harry and Sirius are thinking Christina: Although I generally agree with Legilimens!Lupin, it can be argued. Lupin may just be a very emotionally perceptive individual. He is certainly very good at relating to people even when Legilimency wouldn't help or make a difference (ie, with Molly and the boggart). However, Dumbledore can also tell what people are thinking. I don't think that Legilimency can be used as evidence that somebody is evil. Pippin: >His ability to perform wandless and non-verbal magic Christina: Non-verbal magic is taught to every sixth year student that passes through Hogwarts. And we don't know how common wandless magic is. Again, just because Lupin is a talented wizard, doesn't mean that he is a Death Eater. He could just be, you know, a talented wizard. Christina From belviso at attglobal.net Fri Jan 6 03:02:01 2006 From: belviso at attglobal.net (Magpie) Date: Thu, 5 Jan 2006 22:02:01 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Special treatment - yes or no References: Message-ID: <019401c6126d$914d8630$2d6c400c@Spot> No: HPFGUIDX 145994 hickengruendler: > But by McGonagall, who has her own personal interests. As already > said, if it were Neville or Seamus she had seen flying, they would > have gotten the place in the team. And if it were Snape and he had > seen Goyle flying like this, Snape would have made sure Goyle got in > the team and a good broomstick. Therefore I don't see this as any > special example of special treatment for Harry or even Gryffindor > house in general. And if Harry got some special treatment, than it > wasn't because he's the "Boy who lived", but because he had shown > some extraordinary talent. Magpie: I'm not disagreeing about why Harry is getting his broom etc., but the thing is, *it doesn't matter why* he's getting special treatment. All special treatment has some reason behind it. Why does Harry get his broom? Because he's special--he is different from other first years. (A_svirn even pointed out there have been other talented players, but Harry's the first one whose talent bends the rules and possibly ever produced a broom.) Kids--and adults too--resent special treatment all the time in circumstances that might seem like they shouldn't--imagine how they are when it's not one of those situations. In Harry's case of course any kid would dream of being him. That's the major reasons people read the books--they are fantasies. Even when his life is bad it's significant and important. Whether Harry's special for being talented (which he is) or TBWL doesn't really matter. McGonagall needs a Seeker, she sees that Harry will be good at it, she wants him on her team so she can win and she wants him to have a good broom to ride. It's not like McGonagall is just doing this because she wants to shower Harry with glory and gifts because he's TBWL, agreed. Just as people didn't promote the Olsen twins for 20 years without getting a lot of personal benefits either. That doesn't make the life of an Olsen twin life any less exceptional and dreamlike to an average 20 year old. Harry's experience is very different than other boys in his class--he's a star. He's not only the Boy Who Lived BUT he also happens to be a Quidditch prodigy who's an incredible player without ever having to practice or be taught--and it's not his only talent, either--and one who's allowed to play in first year and own his own broom. That actually reminds me--I'm not sure where I'm going with this--but I remember years ago reading about how PBS did a series for kids about child prodigies. They wanted the show to be inspiring when kids saw these other kids their own age doing these amazing things. In fact, it had *the exact opposite effect.* The kids weren't inspired, they were discouraged and even less enthusiastic about picking up the violin or the math book because they felt they were never going to be as good as a prodigy because they weren't touched by the gods the way the prodigy was. In Harry's case things like talent and happenstance and connection to Voldemort and heredity and the choices and plans of others often also get bound up with the suggestion of a general superiority of character. (Even the prophecy isn't as arbitrary as it first appears--Neville couldn't have handled being TBWL the way Harry has.) kchuplis: I just find that if a book I'm reading disturbs me enough to drop it, I'm probably not going to be following it very long. We definitely approach things differently. Magpie: Probably. Or I may just be klutzier. kchuplis: It would have been an eyeroller if Harry had had a single clue at the moment it happened what it meant. He was, however, completely oblivious. Magpie: That was part of the reason for the eye-rolling for me. I did say "for me." To use the cliche, when it comes to my choosing not to get into the details, it's not you, it's me. When it comes to discussing some things about Ginny or the way she is written, I just turn into Ginny in all the ways I don't like her. I get very impatient very quickly and I begin to want to deal with the discussion just the way Ginny would (think Ginny and Hermione after Sectumsempra, or Zacharias Smith on the Hogwarts Express, if I could do magic). Valky: LOL! You and me both, then because I see your argument building off the assumption that the Slytherins *deserved* that win in PS/SS which would in turn assume that they worked hard to legally and rightfully gain every single point awarded them and we know unequivocally that they didn't. Magpie: Err...no it really doesn't build off that assumption. It just means that when the contest ended Slytherin was in the lead for whatever reason. It never entered my mind that they had to have gotten all their points in exceptionally admirable ways. I would think most of their points were gotten in fairly ordinary ways. If losing points over Norbert is the issue, then that's solved by the giving of the points, period. Slytherin didn't take the points away from the Trio for Norbert, McGonagall did when they get themselves caught by Filch (while gloating about Draco's own detention). Basically you seem to just be saying exactly what Betsy is seeing, that Gryffindor needs to be given the cup in this way to make it clear that the people in their house are superior to the ones in Slytherin. The Gryffindor points should be worth more. -m From tab1669 at elnet.com Fri Jan 6 04:02:38 2006 From: tab1669 at elnet.com (flyingmonkeypurple) Date: Fri, 06 Jan 2006 04:02:38 -0000 Subject: Ginny in HBP and a little SHIP Harry/Ginny WAS: Re: First potions lesson In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 145995 Betsy Hp: A flaw or two might have been nice. An acknowledged flaw, anyway. > kchuplis: She's lippy. That's probably a flaw in many ways. We don't see her enough in classes to know how teachers perceive her. (Which is completely understandable since the books are from Harry's POV and she is a year younger). She's certainly presented as being slightly flirty after puberty. flyingmonkeypurple now: Also Harry is in love with her. He is not going to see any of her flaws. Also Boys don't really think with their brains at that age anyway. Harry is not going to be like Ginny I love you but you have to work on your bad temper and other things. Maybe would pay attention to her flaws if he were 40 years old and married to her. Betsy Hp: She goes from ho-hum about quidditch in GoF to super quidditch genius. She goes from amused from afar by the twins to more twin than the twins. And she goes from loving Ron to hating him. I've catalogued all this before here: kchuplis: So Ginny doesn't push her way into quidditch talk....she's two years younger, she may not have fully developed her interest in it yet. I'm certain those two summers between where she was able to join in playing caused a difference. flyingmonkeypurple now: Maybe Ginny started to like quidditch because Harry did. She could talk to him about it. Play quidditch meet cutie guys. sounds good to me. Then she starts liking the game because she is good at it and because of the boys. Did I miss something when did she become more then the twins? I didn't get the impression that she hated Ron. She was mad at Ron. Brothers and sister argue from time to time. Kchuplis I like what you are saying. Keep up the good work. flyingmonkeypurple. From Aisbelmon at hotmail.com Fri Jan 6 05:01:21 2006 From: Aisbelmon at hotmail.com (M.Clifford) Date: Fri, 06 Jan 2006 05:01:21 -0000 Subject: Special treatment - yes or no In-Reply-To: <019401c6126d$914d8630$2d6c400c@Spot> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 145996 > Valky: > LOL! You and me both, then because I see your argument building > off the assumption that the Slytherins *deserved* that win in PS/SS > which would in turn assume that they worked hard to legally and > rightfully gain every single point awarded them and we know > unequivocally that they didn't. > > Magpie: > Err...no it really doesn't build off that assumption. It just means > that when the contest ended Slytherin was in the lead for whatever > reason. Valky: Yes that is my point. It's not just 'whatever' reason, it's the wrong reasons, calling it whatever reason and emphasising that Slytherin unofficially won the contest definitely ignores that their win was not a fair one, following that is the assumption that it doesn't matter that the outcome wasn't fair to begin with, I think it does matter. The Slytherin House members were all aware that they had gained an unqualified lead over the rest of the houses through the actions of Draco, which were essentially malicious, and through having won Quidditch games in which Marcus Flint had cheated, and through their head of house giving away points in his *high standards* classes for mediocre work. Slytherin House was not disillusioned as to how it had come out the winner, why should they be? And the reason mattered, it mattered to Ravenclaw and Hufflepuff, why shouldn't it, their Quidditch teams nursed injuries with points value on them in Slytherins favour, and so it mattered to Dumbledore. Magpie: > It never entered my mind that they had to have gotten all their > points in exceptionally admirable ways. I would think most of their > points were gotten in fairly ordinary ways. Valky: You would think that, yes, and they probably did get 'most of their points' in ordinary ways. But according to canon, at least most of their lead was ill gotten. Magpie: > If losing points over Norbert is the issue, > then that's solved by the giving of the points, period. Valky: It's one issue, but not the only issue of course as I have said above. Magpie: > Basically you seem to just be saying exactly what Betsy is seeing, > that Gryffindor needs to be given the cup in this way to make it > clear that the people in their house are superior to the ones in > Slytherin. Valky: No, I am definitely not saying that at all. What I am saying is that I reckon Dumbledore awarded the cup this way, and was right to, because the actions of cheating members of Slytherin shouldn't be the deciding factor in the House Cup Competition, remarkable actions of virtuous members should be the deciding factor. And he demosntrated it by constrasting a significator of one against the other. Now there is some degree to which we can say that JKR scapegoated the Slytherins into this role for the purpose of a plot that inspired the minds of younger readers, I won't throw out that point, but Slytherin were the house that cheered their ill-gotten win in the context of the PS/SS story, so scapegoats or not in terms of the series, that was who they were that day. Magpie: > The Gryffindor > points should be worth more. Valky: Sorry, I didn't get that, could you clarify what you meant. From quick_silver71 at yahoo.ca Fri Jan 6 05:05:19 2006 From: quick_silver71 at yahoo.ca (quick_silver71) Date: Fri, 06 Jan 2006 05:05:19 -0000 Subject: Special treatment - yes or no In-Reply-To: <019401c6126d$914d8630$2d6c400c@Spot> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 145997 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Magpie" wrote: > Magpie: > Err...no it really doesn't build off that assumption. It just means that > when the contest ended Slytherin was in the lead for whatever reason. It > never entered my mind that they had to have gotten all their points in > exceptionally admirable ways. I would think most of their points were > gotten in fairly ordinary ways. If losing points over Norbert is the issue, > then that's solved by the giving of the points, period. Slytherin didn't > take the points away from the Trio for Norbert, McGonagall did when they get > themselves caught by Filch (while gloating about Draco's own detention). > > Basically you seem to just be saying exactly what Betsy is seeing, that > Gryffindor needs to be given the cup in this way to make it clear that the > people in their house are superior to the ones in Slytherin. The Gryffindor > points should be worth more. > > -m Maybe the scene in PS/SS was meant to be laced with irony? I mean I've always thought (and heard throughout the fandom) that Slytherin was the house of the cunning, devious, those that would do anything to win, etc, etc. Isn't the sort of what Harry and co. does win the cup at any cost from Slytherin? I wonder if the Slytherin's didn't so much resent the lose of house cup as they did the fact that they'd been outmaneuvered, out-gunned, and overpowered by Harry and Dumbledore (I wonder if Slytherin is all for using everything and anything to win would they even see it as a cheap move or favoritism?). Didn't Dumbledore do something very similar to Snape in PoA (although way more justified)? Dumbledore snatched Snape's glory (and chance of revenge) away from him but helping to free Sirius. So it not like the ending scene of PS/SS is abnormal on Dumbledore's part we've seen him repeat it. As for the issue of House unity and how it was affected by Dumbledore's actions in PS/SS (just a view of the extreme opposite of what everyone else has been saying being the contrary person that I am) maybe Dumbledore felt he was helping House unity? Slytherin had won the house cup 7 times (or something like that) in a row so maybe Dumbledore felt that it was a bad thing to have one house so ascendant. Granted it doesn't seem to have worked but maybe he thought that he was humbling Slytherin? Just a thought. From quick_silver71 at yahoo.ca Fri Jan 6 05:12:19 2006 From: quick_silver71 at yahoo.ca (quick_silver71) Date: Fri, 06 Jan 2006 05:12:19 -0000 Subject: Special treatment - yes or no In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 145998 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "quick_silver71" wrote: > > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Magpie" wrote: > > Magpie: > > Err...no it really doesn't build off that assumption. It just > means that > > when the contest ended Slytherin was in the lead for whatever > reason. It > > never entered my mind that they had to have gotten all their > points in > > exceptionally admirable ways. I would think most of their points > were > > gotten in fairly ordinary ways. If losing points over Norbert is > the issue, > > then that's solved by the giving of the points, period. Slytherin > didn't > > take the points away from the Trio for Norbert, McGonagall did > when they get > > themselves caught by Filch (while gloating about Draco's own > detention). > > > > Basically you seem to just be saying exactly what Betsy is seeing, > that > > Gryffindor needs to be given the cup in this way to make it clear > that the > > people in their house are superior to the ones in Slytherin. The > Gryffindor > > points should be worth more. > > > > -m Maybe the scene in PS/SS was meant to be laced with irony? I mean I've always thought (and heard throughout the fandom) that Slytherin was the house of the cunning, devious, those that would do anything to win, etc, etc. Isn't the sort of what Harry and co. does win the cup at any cost from Slytherin? I wonder if the Slytherin's didn't so much resent the lose of house cup as they did the fact that they'd been outmaneuvered, out-gunned, and overpowered by Harry and Dumbledore (I wonder if Slytherin is all for using everything and anything to win would they even see it as a cheap move or favoritism?). Didn't Dumbledore do something very similar to Snape in PoA (although way more justified)? Dumbledore snatched Snape's glory (and chance of revenge) away from him but helping to free Sirius. So it not like the ending scene of PS/SS is abnormal on Dumbledore's part we've seen him repeat it. As for the issue of House unity and how it was affected by Dumbledore's actions in PS/SS (just a view of the extreme opposite of what everyone else has been saying being the contrary person that I am) maybe Dumbledore felt he was helping House unity? Slytherin had won the house cup 7 times (or something like that) in a row so maybe Dumbledore felt that it was a bad thing to have one house so ascendant. Granted it doesn't seem to have worked but maybe he thought that he was humbling Slytherin? Just a thought. Quick_Silver (saying sorry for not signing his post) From reading77359 at yahoo.com Thu Jan 5 17:52:20 2006 From: reading77359 at yahoo.com (Jet) Date: Thu, 5 Jan 2006 09:52:20 -0800 (PST) Subject: Other ways to destroy Voldemort In-Reply-To: <20060105130638.38748.qmail@web53304.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20060105175220.53894.qmail@web30415.mail.mud.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 145999 Luckdragon: > I believe the best way to Vanquish LV is to rid him of his > powers and leave him as a completely magicless muggle or > squib. Since Power seems to be what is most important to LV > and his belief that muggles are inferior this would be a fate > worse than death for him. I agree; I think the reason his temper and power keep coming up will have to do with the final battle..................Jet From belviso at attglobal.net Fri Jan 6 05:41:25 2006 From: belviso at attglobal.net (Magpie) Date: Fri, 6 Jan 2006 00:41:25 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Special treatment - yes or no References: Message-ID: <01ca01c61283$d5f27410$2d6c400c@Spot> No: HPFGUIDX 146000 >> Magpie: >> Err...no it really doesn't build off that assumption. It just means >> that when the contest ended Slytherin was in the lead for whatever >> reason. > > Valky: > Yes that is my point. It's not just 'whatever' reason, it's the wrong > reasons, calling it whatever reason and emphasising that Slytherin > unofficially won the contest definitely ignores that their win was not > a fair one, Magpie: No, I emphasized that they had officially won the contest (which is why the banners are hanging), and that the winning was fair because they won. There's no subplot about a fixed house contest suddenly being made fair. I said "for whatever reason" meaning that we were not told how every single point was given out during the year, not to suggest that they bought their points on the black market or some other cheating way. It's not just not fair because it's not Gryffindor or because it is Slytherin. Did they break into the hourglass and switch the jewels? Blackmail teachers? The teachers can do magic. They're not getting fooled by anybody, imo. The Slytherins don't seem at all aware that they've earned their lead unfairly that I remember, especially throught he actions of Draco Malfoy. Draco loses them 20 points for being out of bed at night. Later the Trio are caught by Filch. Part of their sacrifice, I would think, is taking the regular consequences of that, which they knew about when they left. > Valky: > You would think that, yes, and they probably did get 'most of their > points' in ordinary ways. But according to canon, at least most of > their lead was ill gotten. Magpie: I don't remember canon that their lead is ill-gotten. All I'm seeing is vague references to Slytherins of course being untrustworthy and assuming stuff we know they do into cheating even though it goes on in public and can easily be punished through points being taken--and sometimes is. There are lots of teachers at school and they can all take points or not give them. I don't think it's realistic to assume Snape is giving his students a thousand points every other day to rack them up, or that he even could do that. I see no reason to think that the teachers--all of them, not just Snape--are perfectly in control of the House Cup contest. I think the other houses don't like Slytherin winning because they don't like Slytherin, period. > Valky: > No, I am definitely not saying that at all. What I am saying is that I > reckon Dumbledore awarded the cup this way, and was right to, because > the actions of cheating members of Slytherin shouldn't be the deciding > factor in the House Cup Competition, remarkable actions of virtuous > members should be the deciding factor. And he demosntrated it by > constrasting a significator of one against the other. Magpie: I don't see that he did. If he wanted to make a point to the Slytherins the way to do that would be to talk to them, not be fine with what they do for seven years and then suddenly pull a passive-aggressive stunt that seems to be about Harry Potter and his house and expect them to get that this is some veiled criticism of Marcus Flint playing too rough at Quidditch. What Dumbledore actually says is "Yes, well done, Slytherin," and then just says that there's some late additions of points that must be accounted for. Then he never mentions Slytherin again. I'm really not seeing how Dumbledore's grand gesture in PS in any way encourages fair play where there was none before, and he certainly doesn't seem to be saying a single thing to Slythern except, "Good job kids, but now we must honor greater things than your ordinary school honors and also give Harry a big triumphant finish." -m From katmac at katmac.cncdsl.com Fri Jan 6 06:54:54 2006 From: katmac at katmac.cncdsl.com (lagattalucianese) Date: Fri, 06 Jan 2006 06:54:54 -0000 Subject: First potions lesson/Harry getting special treatment In-Reply-To: <005501c611ff$6af60ac0$0400a8c0@pensive> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146001 > ... > > My initial reaction was to be horrified that a teacher would so unfairly > single out a first time student in such a way and humiliate him. in fact, > it makes me cringe, every time I read it. That has nothing to do with what > i think of Snape now, but like Harry, it set me off against him from the > beginning. And the entire lesson goes on the same. Even though I never > thought Snape was the one after the stone in that book, I still understood > why the trio might think so. > > Sherry > La Gatta Lucianese: I think this may be a case similar to that of the bouncing ferret: Our initial reaction is altered by subsequent knowledge, in this case of Snape's backstory with James and the Marauders, and his position vis-a-vis Dumbledore and the Death Eaters. Alternatively, it can be argued (though I'm not entirely comfortable with this) that the level of sophistication in the books increases steadily from PS/SS through HBP. I'm not sure whether JKR set out to write a series of children's books and found that it had gotten away from her (Snape goes from being the eleven-year-old's idea of a teacher from hell to something much more complex and tragic), or whether our view of Snape developes from book to book to match Harry's own growing level of awareness. From latha272 at indiatimes.com Fri Jan 6 06:45:47 2006 From: latha272 at indiatimes.com (scamjunk22) Date: Fri, 06 Jan 2006 06:45:47 -0000 Subject: Harry as a Horcrux In-Reply-To: <20060104211626.65975.qmail@web35913.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146002 > Geoff: > > (1) But surely the point is, if Voldemort had killed Harry, > > he would not be a Horcrux, he would have been the vehicle > > used to create one. > > > > (2) I don't subscribe to the Harry-is-a-Horcrux theory. BD wrote: > I do agree that Horcrux!Harry seems very unlikely. I will add > up a couple of more reasons: > > LV wanted to make 7 parts of his soul. So if accidentally > Harry had been made into a horcrux then it means either LV > knows about it or not: > a) If he knows why would he try to kill Harry in GOF - > destroy his own horcrux? - no I do not think so. > b) If he does not know that harry has been made into > horcrux he would go ahead and make the 6 horcruxes he had > planned. That leaves 7 horcruxes in place along with Voldy's > bodily soul part - seems an unlikely scenario given the magical > number 7's importance. I also agree that Harry is not a Horcrux .. and the latest to side this is JKR herself -- to rubbish the idea that the sorting hat is a horcrux, she has said that a horcrux would not draw attention to itself ..... now -- if Harry were a Horcrux, then he would try to do a Neville act and try to be as inconspicous as possible, no? Why try to be seeker, and really enjoy it, and be in the centre of action always? Another point would be that -- if Harry himself was a horcrux, then, he should have been able to control the basilisk himself too -- he would be more potential than a memory!Riddle trying to gain strength from another .... right? And the memory!Riddle trying to set the basilisk on Harry to finish him off, itself would have been the third attempt on Harry's life. I had the impression that when horcruxes are in close proximity, they have a stronger bond and "together" would be more potential and not try to kill/finish/destroy each other off .... And if Harry is the last horcrux, and this is extremely important, then, why should the diary-soul-piece wait to gain strength? The strength and the body to be gained was Harry himself. Harry could have been possessed from early on ... and become Voldemort .... there need not have been a Harry Potter at all .. he would be dead long before now. Also, if Harry were a horcrux, then, there was no need for the Harry-soul-piece to try and repel the Voldy-soul-piece in the MoM.... they could just have worked together (assuming that they do not gel back together) to destroy Harry's soul from inside .... very easy indeed, it would have been to finish off HP... All this is JMO.... Scam -- surprised that she set out to add a couple of points and ended up writing sooooo much :)) [Elf Note: Hi, Scam -- could you please contact the Elves at HPforGrownups-owner at yahoogroups.com? Thanks so much! --Kelley Elf] From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Fri Jan 6 07:37:52 2006 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Fri, 06 Jan 2006 07:37:52 -0000 Subject: Subject: Re: Potion in the Cave In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146003 Nicky Joe wrote: > I've been lurking, but this one caught my attention. > > Carol wrote: > >Voldemort would have no reason to remove his own Horcrux unless he > thought it was in danger of being discovered. The potion ...is to > prevent it from being taken from the cave once it was retrieved. > (Nicky Joe:) > This was never quite plausible to me. I could not understand why LV would not want to kill the potion drinker immediately - like after the first sip! - in order to prevent them from getting their hands on the Horcrux at all. Why allow them to drink it all down and possibly escape with the locket? I really hope JKR has a good explanation for this one, other than the need to weaken DD for his confrontation with Snape. The only explanation I could accept was that there would be some sort of magical alarm raised for LV when the Horcrux was discovered - he might want that person alive to question and determine how he found out about the Horcrux in the first place. But I would expect LV to Apparate to the cave immediately after the alarm was raised, and obviously that didn't happen. Carol responds: After reading your abbreviated quote from my post and your response, I went back to the original post to see what I actually wrote and discovered this gem: "The potion (which I agree is a kind of poisoned memory, appropriately colored a venomous green like Nagini and the blinding flash of an AK) would be there as a deterrent to anyone (not specifically Dumbledore) who got past the other magical protections (with the water and the Inferi as further protections against anyone who succeeded in removing from the pensievelike bowl) to prevent it from being taken from the cave once it was retrieved." http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/145831 What I actually meant was "The potion would deter anyone who got past the other magical protections from reaching the locket by torturing them. Anyone who actually succeeded in retrieving the locket after drinking the potion would be forced to drink the water, arousing the Inferi, which would prevent it from being taken from the cave once it was retrieved." And in the unlikely event that the Horcrux thief actually got past the Inferi and out of the cave, he would die painfully, without the physical strength or magical power to destroy the Horcrux. But I don't think LV expected anyone to get that far. They'd drink the water and stir up the Inferi before they took more than two or three gobletsful of the horrible poisoned memory. To respond to your point, I think he wanted to torture anyone who attempted to retrieve the Horcrux. The effects of the potion (or poisoned memory) seem to combine mental anguish and physical agony (a prolonged Crucio?) in addition to the terrible thirst that can only be quenched by drinking the Inferi-infested water. I'm sure LV thought he was combining a more than sufficient deterrent with a terrible punishment. I agree that LV's failure to apparate immediately to the cave as DD was drinking the potion invalidates the alarm bell theory. I'm actually more interested in reactions (including yours) to the Bellatrix scenario I proposed, but I'll wait for more responses before returning to the thread. But I did feel a need to clarify my meaning and apologize for the convoluted sentence that necessitated the ellipses and to thank Nicky Joe for showing me, through the ellipses, that what I wrote and what I meant were not quite the same. (Now if that were someone else's sentence and it had showed up in a manuscript I was editing, I would have shown it no mercy.) Carol, who would resolve not to write convoluted sentences with multiple parenthetical phrases or clauses but knows she would break the resolution within a week From chewbacca98407 at yahoo.com Fri Jan 6 07:14:42 2006 From: chewbacca98407 at yahoo.com (chewbacca98407) Date: Fri, 06 Jan 2006 07:14:42 -0000 Subject: Special treatment - yes or no In-Reply-To: <01ca01c61283$d5f27410$2d6c400c@Spot> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146004 Magpie wrote: > No, I emphasized that they had officially won the contest > (which is why the banners are hanging), and that the winning > was fair because they won. > There's no subplot about a fixed house contest suddenly being > made fair. I said "for whatever reason" meaning that we were > not told how every single point was given out during the year, > not to suggest that they bought their points on the black market > or some other cheating way. It's not just not fair because it's > not Gryffindor or because it is Slytherin. Did they break into > the hourglass and switch the jewels? Blackmail teachers? > > The Slytherins don't seem at all aware that they've earned their > lead unfairly that I remember, especially throught he actions of > Draco Malfoy. Chewie now: Do you not think that if the points in the end of term feast, awarded to the Gryfs., were given out prior to the end of term that some teacher *caugh- SNAPE -caugh* would have found a way to take them away again? Come on, we have all been reading the same books and the above seems like a no-brainer to me. Sorry if this seems harsh, but come on...please. They had to be awarded at the very end. It was not a slight to the Slytherins, it was a jab at Snape. Imo of course. It has nothing to do with the points being awarded fairly throughout the year or not. They may have been, or may not. It does not matter. From Aisbelmon at hotmail.com Fri Jan 6 07:42:12 2006 From: Aisbelmon at hotmail.com (M.Clifford) Date: Fri, 06 Jan 2006 07:42:12 -0000 Subject: Special treatment - yes or no In-Reply-To: <01ca01c61283$d5f27410$2d6c400c@Spot> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146005 Magpie: No, I emphasized that they had officially won the contest (which is why the banners are hanging), and that the winning was fair because they won. Valky: :) The banners show that their win was anticipated to be announced and made official, or else why was DD entitled to give points prior to the announcement. And by the same token as you said, Gryffindors win was fair because *they* won, was it not? Magpie: There's no subplot about a fixed house contest suddenly being made fair. Valky: I am not sure how to answer that. I don't understand what authority you have that on, Magpie. There *is* a subplot of Slytherins playing unfairly in the House cup challenge. The Potions Master - 'Double Potions with the Slytherins.' said Ron. 'Snape's Head of Slytherin House, they say he always favours them - we'll be able to see if it true.' As they climbed the steps out of the Dungeon an hour later, Harry's mind was racing and his spirits were low. He'd lost two points for Gryffindor in his very first week - *why* did Snape hate him so much? The Midnight Duel - 'Malfoy tricked you' Hermione said to Harry. 'You realise that don't you? He was never going to meet you - Filch knew someone was going to be in the trophy room, Malfoy must have tipped him off.' Hallowe'en - Malfoy seized the package from Harry and felt it. 'That's a broomstick' he said ... 'you'll be for it this time, Potter, first years aren't allowed them.' **Then soon after to Flitwick.** 'Potter's been sent a Broomstick.' said Malfoy quickly. Quidditch - Lee Jordan: 'So - after that obvious and disgusting bit of cheating-' 'Jordan!' growled Professor MacGonagall 'I mean, after that open and revolting foul-' '*Jordan I'm warning you-' 'All right, all right. Flint nearly kills the Gryffindor Seeker, which could happen to anyone, I'm sure..." Nicholas Flamel - Ron didn't answer; Snape had just awarded Hufflepuff a penalty because George Weasley had hit a bludger at him. 'You know how I think they choose people for the Gryffindor Team' said Malfoy a few minutes later, as Snape awarded Hufflepuff another penalty for no reason at all. Magpie: I said "for whatever reason" meaning that we were not told how every single point was given out during the year, not to suggest that they bought their points on the black market or some other cheating way. Valky: Of course not. *I* said they cheated, and they did. I also said that it probably accounts for most of their lead, but I wasn't trying to say they achieved their entire points tally by cheating. Magpie The Slytherins don't seem at all aware that they've earned their lead unfairly that I remember, especially throught he actions of Draco Malfoy. Draco loses them 20 points for being out of bed at night. Later the Trio are caught by Filch. Part of their sacrifice, I would think, is taking the regular consequences of that, which they knew about when they left. Valky: All said, Draco did set out that night with the full intention to earn Slytherin a lead in the House cup by being a rotten little snitch, right? And he managed it. He could have chosen to do something great instead, and if he had done then I'd be with you that Slytherin should have retained their win. Magpie: I don't remember canon that their lead is ill-gotten. All I'm seeing is vague references to Slytherins of course being untrustworthy and assuming stuff we know they do into cheating even though it goes on in public and can easily be punished through points being taken--and sometimes is. There are lots of teachers at school and they can all take points or not give them. Valky: There are enough references to the difference between MacGonagall and Snape. MacGonagall is going to give fair ones to anyone that impresses her and take fair points from thos who do wrong, end of story. Snape OTOH is going to give points as he sees fit and take points only from rivals. Thats how the story goes. It's pretty obvious that there is ill-gotten points in Slytherins Hourglass and undeserved points taken from Gryffindors. Magpie: I don't see that he did. If he wanted to make a point to the Slytherins the way to do that would be to talk to them, not be fine with what they do for seven years and then suddenly pull a passive-aggressive stunt that seems to be about Harry Potter and his house and expect them to get that this is some veiled criticism of Marcus Flint playing too rough at Quidditch. Valky: If you see it as a passive aggressive stunt then that's your opinion, I don't see it that way, obviously. However, I disagree that it can be called a veiled criticism at all, it was more like holding up a mirror to them, allowing them, if they so will, to question heir own methods. It was a simple comparison A you can win the way we all know Slytherin won. (change decoration) or B You can do something outstanding and beat even those who never lose. Dumbledore says well done Slytherin because all of what they did was well done, it achieved the goal of getting the most House Points. But the great actions of Harry Ron Hermione and Neville beat that hands down. JMHO Valky From DaveH47 at mindspring.com Fri Jan 6 08:03:28 2006 From: DaveH47 at mindspring.com (Dave Hardenbrook) Date: Fri, 6 Jan 2006 00:03:28 -0800 Subject: [HPforGrownups] other ways to destroy Voldemort In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <79232887.20060106000328@mindspring.com> No: HPFGUIDX 146006 allies426 wrote: a> I do not believe for a second that Harry will "kill" Voldemort or a> even attempt an Avada Kedavra. Dave: I see we are of one mind. :) allies426: a> Maybe Voldemort will end up that way. It would ensure that he was no a> threat (if he can't remember anything, he can't remember to take a> over the WW, right?). Dave: This would certainly be an "Ozzy" ending, since the favorite means in the Oz Books to vanquish a villain is to force them to drink from the "Forbidden Fountain", whose "Water of Oblivion" completely erases the drinker's memory and renders them "innocent as a baby". Luckdragon wrote: a> I believe the best way to Vanquish LV is to rid him of his a> powers and leave him as a completely a> magicless muggle or squib. Since Power seems to be what is most a> important to LV and his belief that a> muggles are inferior this would be a fate worse than death for him. Dave: Perhaps then LV, like Hitler, would commit suicide -- This may be one way "one must die at the hand of the other" without Harry actually having to commit murder. -- Dave From c.john at imperial.ac.uk Fri Jan 6 08:39:00 2006 From: c.john at imperial.ac.uk (esmith222002) Date: Fri, 06 Jan 2006 08:39:00 -0000 Subject: TBAY: Re: DD and Godric's Hollow (Long) Draught of Living Death, DD&Snape in HBP In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146007 Interesting theory! Might also explain why Harry seemed to be hanging on after being bitten by the Basilisk. It also seems to have been suggested that Snape & Lily may have been working on the potion together. There clearly seems to be some link between Lily and Snape. If this was the case, it is possible that Lily administered the potion to Harry whilst James was fighting off Voldedmort. Perhaps Lily's sacrifice then enhanced the power of the potion!! DRIBBLE SLIPPERS (Snape and LIly's Prototype Potion Enhanced haRry's (sorry!) Survival)!!!!!!!!!! Hagrid takes Harry to the headquarters of the Order (somewhere in Wales) where DD (and possibly Snape) figure out exactly what has happened to Harry. DD leaves early to ensure that all is in place at Privet Drive, followed some time later by Hagrid & Harry. I guess my major problem remains that it does rather detract from Lily's sacrifice. Brothergib From hickengruendler at yahoo.de Fri Jan 6 08:44:37 2006 From: hickengruendler at yahoo.de (hickengruendler) Date: Fri, 06 Jan 2006 08:44:37 -0000 Subject: Special treatment - yes or no In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146008 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "a_svirn" wrote: > a_svirn: > I beg to differ. The school rules are bended specially for Harry ? > normally first years are not allowed to the team. Wood ? surely an > authority on the all things Quidditch ? said that Harry is the > youngest player in a century. Hickengruendler: And that probably means, that there were Quidditch players as young as Harry before, and that it therefore was not an exception specifically done for him, but rather something that happens very, very seldom. Anyway, Charlie and James might have been naturals in Quidditch as well, but I don't think McGonagall saw them catching something that resembles a snitch during their first flying lesson. Anyway, if I'm not misremembering things, there is no school rule that first years aren't allowed in the team. If there's a problem, than it is regarding the broomstick and not regarding Harry becoming a member of the team. From h2so3f at yahoo.com Fri Jan 6 08:59:26 2006 From: h2so3f at yahoo.com (h2so3f) Date: Fri, 06 Jan 2006 08:59:26 -0000 Subject: Subject: Re: Potion in the Cave In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146009 Nicky Joe wrote: " I'm actually wondering if Regulus tried to destroy the Horcrux and ended up frying himself in the process. They say he was "killed by LV" but never mentions how. The other Blacks and DEs would have assumed LV killed him because he was already in disfavor. And depending on the timing (interesting how timing is everything when it comes to the final book) R.A.B. could have been taking the locket about the time LV was preoccupied with the Potters, which is why LV never discovered the Horcrux was missing." CH3ed: Well if Regulus was killed by LV or his DEs then there would have been a dark mark hovering over his body, ay? That is how DD knew the DEs hadn't ambushed Slug when DD and Harry found his house in a busted state. CH3ed confesses to have missed Carol's original post containing the Bella theory entirely and would really appreciate a reminder of the thread number so he can look it up. :O) Thanks!! From gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk Fri Jan 6 11:10:39 2006 From: gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk (Geoff Bannister) Date: Fri, 06 Jan 2006 11:10:39 -0000 Subject: Special treatment - yes or no In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146010 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "hickengruendler" wrote: > > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "a_svirn" wrote: > > > a_svirn: > > I beg to differ. The school rules are bended specially for Harry ? > > normally first years are not allowed to the team. Wood ? surely an > > authority on the all things Quidditch ? said that Harry is the > > youngest player in a century. > > Hickengruendler: > > And that probably means, that there were Quidditch players as young as > Harry before, and that it therefore was not an exception specifically > done for him, but rather something that happens very, very seldom. > Anyway, Charlie and James might have been naturals in Quidditch as > well, but I don't think McGonagall saw them catching something that > resembles a snitch during their first flying lesson. Anyway, if I'm not > misremembering things, there is no school rule that first years aren't > allowed in the team. If there's a problem, than it is regarding the > broomstick and not regarding Harry becoming a member of the team. Geoff: That is how I interpret these pieces of canon: '"He's just the build for a Seeker too," said Wood, now walking around Harry and staring at him. "Light - speedy - we'll have to get him a decent broom, Professor - a Nimbus Two Thousand or a Cleansweep Seven, I'd say." "I shall speak to Professor Dumbledore and see if we can't bend the first-year rule..." (PS "The Midnight Duel" p.113 UK edition) '"Seeker?" he said. "But first-years never - you must be the youngest house player in about -" "- a century," said Harry, shovelling pie into his mouth. He felt particularly hungry after the excitement of the afternoon. "Wood told me."' (ibid.) I think Ron here is on the point of saying that first-years are never selected. It is quite obvious from earlier exchanges between Professor McGonagall and Oliver Wood in the same chapter that it is quite in order to have a first-year on a team but that no one has shown the same aptitude for being a Seeker in recent years. The reference to bending the "first-year rule" is obviously meaning that regarding the ownership of a broom. From willsonkmom at msn.com Fri Jan 6 13:00:20 2006 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Fri, 06 Jan 2006 13:00:20 -0000 Subject: Special treatment - yes or no In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146011 > Valky: > I am not sure how to answer that. I don't understand what authority > you have that on, Magpie. There *is* a subplot of Slytherins playing > unfairly in the House cup challenge. > > The Potions Master - 'Double Potions with the Slytherins.' said Ron. > 'Snape's Head of Slytherin House, they say he always favours them - > we'll be able to see if it true.' > > As they climbed the steps out of the Dungeon an hour later, Harry's > mind was racing and his spirits were low. He'd lost two points for > Gryffindor in his very first week - *why* did Snape hate him so much? Potioncat: Harry lost 2 points, and I agree it was unfair. But, although Malfoy was praised for his skill, he did not earn points. In fact I don't think we ever see Snape give anyone points in any of the books. I've snipped two other examples of Malfoy trying to trick Harry, neither of them resulted in any loss of points. >Valky: > Quidditch - Lee Jordan: 'So - after that obvious and disgusting bit of > cheating-' > 'Jordan!' growled Professor MacGonagall > 'I mean, after that open and revolting foul-' > '*Jordan I'm warning you-' > 'All right, all right. Flint nearly kills the Gryffindor Seeker, which > could happen to anyone, I'm sure..." Potioncat: If it is cheating, why is McGonagall warning Jordan? I've been on the sidelines of many a kids' sporting events, parents are always convinced the "other" side is getting away with something. > Valky: > Nicholas Flamel - Ron didn't answer; Snape had just awarded Hufflepuff > a penalty because George Weasley had hit a bludger at him. > 'You know how I think they choose people for the Gryffindor Team' said > Malfoy a few minutes later, as Snape awarded Hufflepuff another > penalty for no reason at all. Potioncat: I won't argue this one. In the explanation of these points, I wouldn't trust Ron or Snape. > > Valky: > All said, Draco did set out that night with the full intention to earn > Slytherin a lead in the House cup by being a rotten little snitch, > right? And he managed it. He could have chosen to do something great > instead, and if he had done then I'd be with you that Slytherin should > have retained their win. Potioncat: I'm at a loss here. I thought Draco wanted to get Harry in trouble. Does he say his goal is to get the House Cup? In fact, a staff member is breaking the law, so the Trio aren't up to good either. (Of course, I'm fully behind them in this one.) What great thing could he have done? I think the better thing would have been to report the dragon to a teacher. > Valky: > There are enough references to the difference between MacGonagall and > Snape. MacGonagall is going to give fair ones to anyone that impresses > her and take fair points from thos who do wrong, end of story. Snape > OTOH is going to give points as he sees fit and take points only from > rivals. Thats how the story goes. It's pretty obvious that there is > ill-gotten points in Slytherins Hourglass and undeserved points taken > from Gryffindors. Potioncat: Again, we've seen Snape be unfair and cause Harry to lose points. We haven't seen Slytherin "get" points unfairly. And DD seems to acknowledge their work. > > OOPs, not sure if this is Valky or Magpie: > Dumbledore says well done Slytherin because all of what they did was > well done, it achieved the goal of getting the most House Points. But > the great actions of Harry Ron Hermione and Neville beat that hands down. Potioncat: In fact, the 150 points that the Trio earn counter the 150 points that *McGonagall* took from Gryffindor. She took them because the kids were out of bounds and she thought they had tricked Malfoy. And as she thought they had tricked Neville too, the 50 points from him were not fair. She should only have docked him 20 like she had Malfoy. SS/PS is written from a standard of Gryffindors are the good guys and Slytherins are the bad guys. Every Slytherin we meet acts badly. It's a standard plot in stories and usually the listener (reader) doesn't question it. Lancaster/Yorks, Hatfields/McCoys, This School/That School. So when DD adds the well earned points at the end of SS/PS most of us cheered. We'd had how many 100 pages of bad Slytherins, with a page or two telling us Snape had been doing an occasional good deed. A few books later, we come along and start thinking about everything. That's when things get complicated. JKR has written *some* things for the fun of it, not so much the morality of it. Given all the Trio had been through, the public awarding of points was a real pleasure. I still maintain that JKR wrote this scene for its effect for that moment and that book. It would not have been the right way to do things. But, given that Snape is shaking McGonagall's hand and is smiling. I don't the reader is to think it was handled in an extremely unheard of way. Potioncat, who seems to be taking both sides. From xmezumiiru at yahoo.com Fri Jan 6 14:11:42 2006 From: xmezumiiru at yahoo.com (An'nai Jiriki) Date: Fri, 6 Jan 2006 06:11:42 -0800 (PST) Subject: Draco's Intention was: Re: [HPforGrownups] Re: Special treatment - yes or no In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20060106141142.14676.qmail@web31714.mail.mud.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 146012 --- potioncat wrote: > > Valky: > > All said, Draco did set out that night with the > full intention to > earn > > Slytherin a lead in the House cup by being a > rotten little snitch, > > right? And he managed it. He could have chosen to > do something great > > instead, and if he had done then I'd be with you > that Slytherin > should > > have retained their win. > > Potioncat: > I'm at a loss here. I thought Draco wanted to get > Harry in trouble. > Does he say his goal is to get the House Cup? In > fact, a staff member > is breaking the law, so the Trio aren't up to good > either. (Of > course, I'm fully behind them in this one.) What > great thing could he > have done? I think the better thing would have been > to report the > dragon to a teacher. > Potioncat: > In fact, the 150 points that the Trio earn counter > the 150 points > that *McGonagall* took from Gryffindor. She took > them because the > kids were out of bounds and she thought they had > tricked Malfoy. And > as she thought they had tricked Neville too, the 50 > points from him > were not fair. She should only have docked him 20 > like she had Malfoy. I saw Draco as doing the same thing Harry was doing with the Dragon. Draco was out of bounds because he thought there was a dragon in the school and perhaps he could do something about it. Just Like Harry! For good or ill, Draco was doing the same thing Harry did. And Draco did the right thing when caught, telling the teacher! The school does a horrible thing to Draco throughout the first book by saying one thing and rewarding opposite behaviour for just a few. No wonder Draco is so jaded throughout the rest of the books. While it was fair that McGonagall took points away and gave dentention, it wasn't fair in the grand scheme because Harry rarely gets points taken away for being out of bounds. Mezu PS: We can only speculate what would have happened if the dragon was caught. I think DD would have rewarded the trio, even if it was wrong. <- This is only opinion/venting, I'm not really saying to to start conversation. "You irritate me. Kill me now." ~Javert, Les Miserables __________________________________________ Yahoo! DSL Something to write home about. Just $16.99/mo. or less. dsl.yahoo.com From xmezumiiru at yahoo.com Fri Jan 6 14:47:34 2006 From: xmezumiiru at yahoo.com (An'nai Jiriki) Date: Fri, 6 Jan 2006 06:47:34 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Breaking rules/House points Was:Re: First potions lesson/Harry getting special t In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20060106144734.4239.qmail@web31701.mail.mud.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 146013 Before beginning, thank you for clearing up my mistakes. --- annemehr wrote: > Chris: > > Third, we don't know if Hagrid told DD that the > trio > > knew of Fluffy or that they knew how to pass him. > We > > also do not know if Hagrid told DD that an unknown > > person knew of how to pass Fluffy. If Hagrid kept > > this to himself, he was extremely irresponsible. > If he > > did tell DD any of it, DD then allowed the events > to > > take place by not changing the traps. These > things > > are known as negligence in our world and are > > prosicutable the same as the crime that was > committed. > > > Annemehr: > Given that the "traps" were apparently quite > passable by a fully > qualified wizard with any sense (or, alternatively, > three first year > students), there has been what I think is sound > speculation that the > first six of them were there to slow one down and > most likely to be an > alarm for DD that someone was passing them ("No > sooner had I reached > London than *it became clear to me* that the place I > should be was the > one I had just left"). If that is true, then the > fact that Hagrid told > someone the secret to passing Fluffy would not have > mattered much. > Given the difference in the way Hagrid talks about > it before and after > the kids' trip down the trapdoor it's clear he > didn't realise the > significance of what he'd done until afterward. Yes, DD realized something, but we only hear of that as a passing afterthought. If DD was the only one who knew all the traps, that was irresponsible of him to not let any other teacher know, especially with him leaving the building. If Hagrid told DD about the stranger or Harry, DD should have changed something to keep security. DD was irresponsible here. Also, even if Hagrid realized his mistake afterwards, after all he has been through, why would he not tell DD he told others of Fluffy? Granted Hagrid is not the sharpest tool in the shed, even children know when something is extremely important and will tell even if it gets them in trouble. > Chris: > > Finally, the trio snuck out after hours. > > Annemehr: > Again, condoned (by DD and JKR) in a good cause. > The DA is another > example (not after hours, but definitely against the > rules). But children (and all Hogwarts students are children) need to have defined boundaries. Only then can they know they can cross them for a good cause. Example, even us as adults know not to speed in our cars, it's illegal (and I'm assuming it is the same for non-USA countires as well). But we all know if we speed, we get fined. If we don't, we speed more often. But we also know that speeding to a hospital to get emergency care is excusable. It's no wonder that Harry continously breaks the after hours rule, it's not applied evenly. He only fears Snape and McGonagall. No other teacher punishes him for being out. I include Remus on this because even his little speech about being out fell on deaf ears. > Chris: > > Also, the reasons DD gave for > > awarding the points was pathetic: 'Cool use of > > intellect', 'the best game of chess Hogwarts has > ever > > seen', 'Pure Love'. > > Annemehr (with benefit of book): > Actually, it was "cool use of logic in the face of > fire," "the best > game of chess Hogwarts has seen in many years," and > "pure nerve and > outstanding courage." Thanks for the quotes, but my point still stands. The deuling club in book 2 should have generated thousands of points if that reasoning stands. I'm sure the chess club has had its player that put on a good game from time to time. I don't recall many point given in later books for courage or nerve. I think the point the books make is that being normal (reletively) is not important. > Chris: > > The only points I think that were deserved was > > Neville's, but even then, why should he be > rewarded > > for doing what is right unless everyone is awarded > the > > same. > > Annemehr: > *All* house points are awarded for doing what's > right, and what > Neville did there was not only right, but not easy. But not all Slyths are evil and following LV or Draco. They are doing what is right and it certainly not easy. Why are they not rewarded as well? And not all house points are awarded for doing something right. Students receive points sometimes for answering questions. To me the house points system only creates competition, not cooperation. It will be very unrealistic in the 7th book if all or some of the house unite to defeat LV. Telling competing memeber to work as a team never works under pressure, the competition is just too strong. Mezu "You irritate me. Kill me now." ~Javert, Les Miserables __________________________________________ Yahoo! DSL Something to write home about. Just $16.99/mo. or less. dsl.yahoo.com From xmezumiiru at yahoo.com Fri Jan 6 15:03:44 2006 From: xmezumiiru at yahoo.com (An'nai Jiriki) Date: Fri, 6 Jan 2006 07:03:44 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Points awarded to Trio in PS/SS WAS:Re: First potions lesson In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20060106150344.48170.qmail@web31713.mail.mud.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 146014 --- dumbledore11214 wrote: > Chris: > > The trio did not defeat LV, and neither did Harry, > he > > just expelled a demon. > > Alla: > > Without Trio expelling a demon and this demon was > Voldemort himself > in his spirit form, Voldemort may have had a chance > on getting a > stone and reemerging in full glory several years > earlier than he did, > IMO. Chris: Really, I seem to remember that LV could not get the stone because he wanted to use it. DD set up the mirror that only someone who wanted the stone, but not use it could have it. Harry endangered the stone and the rest of the world by giving LV the access to the stone. > > Chris: > > How could Sliths expect to be treated with > anything as > > good as indifference after that stunt. DD told > almost > > 100 Sliths and about 200 others that no matter how > > good they are or how hard they work, all it take > is > > one moment of stupidity that their personalities > are > > not wired for to be loved and win all the glory. > He > > all but says that standing up for what is right is > > good, but not nearly as good as breaking the rules > and > > putting lives in danger aka "It's ok as long as > the > > world is saved". > > Alla: > > Erm... yes. A LOT of things are forgiven in > Potterverse IMO if you > are saving the world and I would not have the books > any other way. It > is OK for two students to go to the dangerous > Chamber of Secrets > because of they were saving an innocent life, it is > more than OK but > commendable to break the rules and use the time > turner ( with the > blessing of the Headmaster no less) when youa re > saving not one but > two innocent lives. > > I think JKR is very loud and clear that for higher > noble purpose > rules not only could be broken but SHOULD be broken. > > Fred and George are leaving the school as heroes > after they > initiated of very LOUD breaking the rules against > dear Umbridge and > this was not even saving the world, just act of > civil disobedience, > IMO. Chris: The lessons the books teach are good and should be taught, but they are not taught in a way that the lessons can be used. It's not OK for children to ignore adults and do what they want anyway. Harry and Ron had Lockhart at their mercy and should have gone to a teacher for help, not what they did. It's not OK for children or anyone to do what they want simply because you know something different than what is accepted as truth. We see the concequences of those action by Sirius being dead because Harry doesn't follow the rules. It's certainly not OK to buck the justice system, even if it is flawed, just to save 1 or 2 lives. Harry should have been fighting the ministry to present the truth of Sirius. Truth serum, non-cheating quills, and the pensives are all ways Harry could have told the truth. Instead he aided an escaped convict, keeping him hidden when he could have been freed. > As to how Slyths could expect to be treated good > after this - they > WERE. They won the cup for SEVEN years. After that > little fact I > personally don't buy for a second that Dumbledore is > in any way, > shape or form prejudiced against Slytherins. It is > just as Valky > said - this year Trio committed IMO the act of > heroism and were > rewarded for that. > > Could Dumbledore award points earlier? I guess, but > it made for such > great read and I like what Pippin speculated that > maybe last minutes > points are often awarded, we just have not seen it. > > IMO of course, > > Alla Chris: Yes, it made for a great read, I completely agree. That's why these are such great fiction books. But DD was still cruel to the Slyths by awarding the points the way he did. And we do not know that the Slyths did anything unfair to earn any of their points. (There are examples in the books of Gryffs cheating in Quiddich, just as the Slyths did.) We never see any other example of Slyths earning unfair points (barring Umbridge). I suspect Slyths earned their points fairly and I've only seen Gryffs awarding things unfairly. Mezu "You irritate me. Kill me now." ~Javert, Les Miserables __________________________________________ Yahoo! DSL Something to write home about. Just $16.99/mo. or less. dsl.yahoo.com From gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk Fri Jan 6 15:29:38 2006 From: gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk (Geoff Bannister) Date: Fri, 06 Jan 2006 15:29:38 -0000 Subject: Harry getting special treatment In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146015 In message 146001, La Gatta Lucianese wrote: "Alternatively, it can be argued (though I'm not entirely comfortable with this) that the level of sophistication in the books increases steadily from PS/SS through HBP. I'm not sure whether JKR set out to write a series of children's books and found that it had gotten away from her (Snape goes from being the eleven-year-old's idea of a teacher from hell to something much more complex and tragic), or whether our view of Snape developes from book to book to match Harry's own growing level of awareness." Geoff: In my opinion, this is possibly one of the most revealing comments made in this thread. Jo Rowling has intimated that the books certainly began as children's books and I think that this is at the heart of the current discussion. When I was about 10-12 years old, as a pre-teen, I used to read comics. They included normal illustrated publications ? including that most marvellous of comics "Eagle" (sigh) ? but there were also one or two "text" comics which featured quite long stories intended to be read properly, if that doesn't sound too snobbish. They included "Wizard" (surprise!) and "Rover". These often had story lines involving teachers who were nasty, dim or over-authoritarian; some has similar stereotyped characters who were, for example, in the police. The well-known children's writer Enid Blyton often had adults who were set up as "baddies" to be defeated by the combined talents of young people and sometimes other sympathetic adults. This was fairly standard fare. We did not involve ourselves in the rights and wrongs or the ethics of what was being done. Rules often got bent in the need for those "wearing white hats" to win and we would always be glad that good prevailed. I think that this still prevails in some younger children's literature. Books are fairly short, episodes brief and the plot moves at a good pace. I feel that this covers the early books in the series. It is as the readership who first met with Harry when they were perhaps the same age have moved on into adolescence (or senescence in some of our cases!) that the style of the books has subtly altered. Agreed, in the later books, there is more back story to support but the episodes have become longer and exposition ? such as Dumbledore's discussions with Harry ? has become lengthier and more involved. Someone recently suggested that incidents in "Philosopher's Stone" are written for the satisfaction of younger readers may be correct. They will vicariously enjoy the comeuppances suffered by certain groups of characters in the book who may come under the heading of "baddies". The length and style of the later books echo Harry's move into his teens and the realisation that the world is not black and white but displays a whole range of greys, both in moral attitudes and in characters' personal agendas, and the realisation that the looming threat of Voldemort is overshadowing the naivet? of his early years at Hogwarts. Changing tack slightly, I have written on more than one occasion in the past about what I see as the danger of taking ourselves (and the books) too seriously. I read a book for pleasure, not to dissect it analytically. When I was at Grammar school, Shakespeare was often ruined for me because we would discuss the play, dissect and analyse it for exam purposes and it was only when I was involved in acting in some of them that I really began to appreciate their worth. One of my favourites is "MacBeth" and it remains so because of my involvement on stage. Since the publication of HBP nearly six months ago, our group has been swamped with threads about Snape and Horcruxes ad infinitum and ad nauseum many of which I have tended to skip over, not being a Snape fan (shock and horror ? heretic!). We seem have fallen into the trap of what I have been credited with calling "tennis match posts" whereby two or three members swap posts, often repeating the same details and none of them moving from entrenched positions, often becoming obsessive and occasionally impolite in their responses. I hope that many HPFGU members, like me, are here for fun ? as well as enlightenment and the meeting of kindred minds. I sometimes sigh nostalgically for pre-HBP days when we could get into threads which investigated peripheral snippets of knowledge. I think of a long thread which Shaun Hately and I steered a couple of years back when we looked into Riddles diary and the significance of Vauxhall Road; it threw up a huge amount of additional detail about orphanages inter alia. Do not misunderstand me. There is a place for the sort of discussions which we are having, but as we sometimes say in the UK "You can have too much of a good thing". I repeat what I quoted in a previous post: while writing this, my mind went to the end of the film "Star Trek: Insurrection" where Artim, the young Baku boy, says to Data: "Don't forget ? you have some little fun every day." Our thought for the day? From ornawn at 013.net Fri Jan 6 15:57:13 2006 From: ornawn at 013.net (ornadv) Date: Fri, 06 Jan 2006 15:57:13 -0000 Subject: Special treatment - yes or no Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146016 >Irene >Again - I know that saving the world is more important >than following the rules. But first of all other >characters are not privy to "saving the world" >context, and some of the cases above have nothing to >do with it. >Hickengruendler: >And that probably means, that there were Quidditch players as young >as Harry before, and that it therefore was not an exception >specifically done for him, but rather something that happens very, >very seldom. Orna: Combining both of you ? I think that's the point- Harry as unique abilities, (flying , loving and I think also evoking love in others) and a unique destiny (save the WW). I think the point about special treatment is that it there is some tension between attuned treatment for specific pupils, and fair treatment for everybody. IMO it's obvious Harry does get special treatment ? but I'm not sure it is plain favorism. It may look like this, and his fellow students look like they think it is ? even Ron feels envious about Harry ? here and there. But the point is, that DD and other teachers have to apply the best method of teaching Harry ? with his special abilities, and his special destiny. Adopting a Snape-like policy ? of no favoritism, ignoring Harry's special ness ? isn't a very sound way of acting, IMO. If you have an especially talented student, and relate to him, as if it doesn't exist, it isn't much better than ignoring a students p [problem - because "everybody deserves the same treatment". And I think Harry's special treatment is usually because of his abilities (Quidditch), or his destiny (dealing with Voldemort). Well, sometimes because McGonagall wants desperately to win the house-cup ? nothing personal there. Having said that, I do agree that it distorts sometimes the way of relating towards him ? DD admits it in OotP. By the way, I think it is quite clear, that it is a common distortion ? working both ways sometimes ? in OotP, his "special treatment" included having degrading remarks published in the "prophet", as well as having a minister applied teacher fighting cruelly against him. I would think it would be very inappropriate and unfair to have him deal with those "special treatments" without balancing them here and them with helpful training and a couple of biscuits. Now I come to think, that perhaps it has to do with Harry having a special ability to evoke love in some people (Nick, Hagrid, DD, Molly, Neville ? the list is long). I don't see them favor him because of him being Famous, but basically because they grow to love him (let's admit, how many of us would give up Halloween dinner and go for a death-party instead?). Orna From xcpublishing at yahoo.com Fri Jan 6 16:45:21 2006 From: xcpublishing at yahoo.com (xcpublishing) Date: Fri, 06 Jan 2006 16:45:21 -0000 Subject: Subject: Re: Potion in the Cave Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146017 Carol responds: >What I actually meant was "The potion would deter anyone who got past the other magical protections from reaching the locket by torturing them. Anyone who actually succeeded in retrieving the locket after drinking the potion would be forced to drink the water, arousing the Inferi, which would prevent it from being taken from the cave once it was retrieved." I did get that point (even with all the parens - see, I do it, too!) and I think that was JKR's intention with the potion, also. However, the potion has always annoyed me for two reasons. 1) It was meant to torture and eventually kill the drinker, and yet DD managed to drink the whole thing and make it all the way back to Hogwarts WITH the locket. Admittedly, he's the most powerful wizard alive, but he's still an *old man* and his constitution should have been weaker than many people LV would have expected to retrieve the Horcrux. And LV should have expected that DD, of all people, might be one of those to retrieve it. I just can't accept that the potion didn't kill the drinker faster. Unless LV didn't test it enough first. I suppose he couldn't have killed off too many people in the early days and keep it hushed up! And 2) why didn't DD at least try to dump one gobletfull on the ground or into the lake? I'm sure it wouldn't have worked and the basin would have just refilled, but any logical person would have at least TRIED it before drinking the nasty stuff!!! >And in the unlikely event that the Horcrux thief actually got past the Inferi and out of the cave, he would die painfully, without the physical strength or magical power to destroy the Horcrux. Probably, but who would know how far they had gotten with the Horcrux or where they might have hidden it? Unless LV has a homing device attached to the things, I would think he wouldn't want them wandering far from where he left them. >But I don't think LV expected anyone to get that far. They'd drink the water and stir up the Inferi before they took more than two or three gobletsful of the horrible poisoned memory. The problem I have with this theory is that LV expects a single person to try to retrieve the Horcrux. It bothered me a bit that DD only took Harry with him. Why not take Harry, Hagrid, McGonagall, and a couple of Order members? And Madam Pompfrey standing by outside the cave? He knew how dangerous the Horcruxes were (witness his hand) - why was he so careless and/or reckless to take only Harry along? Ego? >I'm actually more interested in reactions (including yours) to the Bellatrix scenario I proposed, but I'll wait for more responses before returning to the thread. I think it is entirely possible that Bellatrix knows about the Horcruxes and I'm not dismissing your theory about her putting it into the cave for LV, but in my opinion she just seems to be too much of a blabbermouth for LV to take the chance of telling her his deepest secret. To me, she's pretty much a typical fiction villainess - "Prepare to die, Potter!" that loves to toot her own horn. It would be very hard for someone like that to keep the Horcruxes a secret. Which might actually be how Regulas found out about the locket, lol! What I don't like about your theory is Kreacher. If he was with Bellatrix when she put the locket in the cave, he would recognize it when they discovered it in 12GP. Wouldn't he tell Bellatrix? LV would have known the Horcrux was no longer in the cave and would have gone there to see who had gotten through his little traps. CH3ed writes: >Well if Regulus was killed by LV or his DEs then there would have been a dark mark hovering over his body, ay? That is how DD knew the DEs hadn't ambushed Slug when DD and Harry found his house in a busted state. True. Canon just states "Regulus was killed by Voldemort" but it doesn't go into any detail. I'm wondering where he was killed and who found the body? Timewise, I'm picturing Regulus taking the locket, hiding it at 12GP, then being summoned by LV and blasted. That way, he had no time to even try to destroy the locket. Nicky Joe From foxmoth at qnet.com Fri Jan 6 16:49:05 2006 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Fri, 06 Jan 2006 16:49:05 -0000 Subject: Ginny in HBP and a little SHIP Harry/Ginny WAS: Re: First potions lesson In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146018 > > >>kchuplis: > > Was she supposed to be a complete dweeb? > > Betsy Hp: > A flaw or two might have been nice. An acknowledged flaw, anyway. > She does have an enormous chip on her shoulder and can go from quiet > to raging fury in sixty seconds, but I get the sense that's supposed > to be a plus in JKR's eyes. (If it's a left over Voldemort piece > and it turns out her personality changes were from her brush with a > horcrux I will take everything I said about her and JKR's handling > of her back. I will also be thrilled beyond measure. But I fear > this will not happen.) Pippin: It's not time for Harry to notice her flaws. He's infatuated. If JKR makes Ginny's flaws obvious to the reader, then Harry will look like a lovestruck dolt for not noticing them (cough*Tonks*cough.) But I think there could be some serious (not insurmountable) problems on the horizon. Ginny is secretive and so is Harry. They *think* they understand each other so well they don't need to talk things out. That could be a problem all by itself. But there's also something I'm a little suspicious about. Tom tells us that Ginny was very much ashamed to come to school in second hand robes. She stole the diary from Harry's room. She "borrowed" the Twins' brooms. Ron has to scrape for dress robes and a Quidditch broom, Ginny's come out of nowhere. Luna's things are stolen during the year and turn up again at the end of term. I'm wondering if Ginny hasn't got a streak of Mundungus in her. Maybe not, but it could certainly be a problem if people started to think she did, especially if one of them is Harry. > > > >>kchuplis: > > What was the "change"?? I have now read these books three times > > and I do not see this huge character discrepancy some of you refer > > to. > > > > Betsy Hp: > She goes from ho-hum about quidditch in GoF to super quidditch > genius. She goes from amused from afar by the twins to more twin > than the twins. And she goes from loving Ron to hating him. I've > catalogued all this before here: > > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/144816 Pippin: The other way of looking at her behavior at the QWC is that she was so enrapt that she forced herself to stay awake past the point of physical exhaustion and it was that, not boredom, that put her to sleep. Ginny was keeping her Quidditch fascination a secret from her family, so if she suddenly started making astute comments, they'd notice. And then the Twins would start keeping a better eye on their brooms. Ginny cried as the twins went back to school in PS/SS and they promised to send her a toilet seat (evidently their highest accolade, since they try to give Harry one at the end of the book.) They've always been close, in other words. Her puckish sense of humor came out in those greeting cards, along with her power as a witch. Harry couldn't make her PoA card stop screeching. There's a touch of Ron's antagonism in "She never shuts up normally" about a girl who turns out not to be a chatterbox but is in the habit of telling her brother exactly what she thinks of him. The moment when it dawns on her that Harry pulls on his jeans one leg at a time is shown to us in GoF, where she discovers that talking to Harry is no harder than talking to Ron. She actually tells Harry to shut up, then announces to the whole common room that he's been turned down by the girl he asked to the ball. Of course she's not happy to realize that she could have had a date with Harry if she hadn't accepted Neville. But that's the point. She realizes she actually could have a date with Harry one day -- he's not famous wonderful TBWL whom she can only worship from afar, he's a teenage boy who gets turned down and worries that he'll have to date a troll. We find out why she wasn't in the hospital wing in GoF when we learn about the six visitors rule in HBP. Ginny's been handled very sneakily, but not badly, I'd say. I did get a little tired of hearing about the monster in Harry's chest, but it's as clever a way as any of indicating to the older readers what Harry is going through without offending the sensibilities of the younger ones (or their parents.) Pippin From zgirnius at yahoo.com Fri Jan 6 17:20:28 2006 From: zgirnius at yahoo.com (zgirnius) Date: Fri, 06 Jan 2006 17:20:28 -0000 Subject: Snape again/Love and Vengeance/Ending In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146019 SSSusan wrote: > > Because I am a DDM!Snaper, in my mind Snape's comeuppance may have > already come in his taking DD's life. If he *is* DDM, and if his > loyalty really does lie with the Order, and if I'm right that DD > commanded/requested that Snape kill him, then casting that AK may > have been the most painful, most difficult thing Snape's had to do in > a long, long time, or ever. > > So, to me, if he proves out as DDM, then I'll be content with that as > punishment enough for Snape. He had to kill the man he most admired, > respected and perhaps loved? He had to lose the trust of all those > in the Order? He had to flee Hogwarts? All because of how it > *appeared* that he'd murdered DD because he wanted to. Yikes! That's > painful. > > I know that that doesn't address the notion of *karmic* payback which > Lupinlore explained more fully one time, that the payback or > comeuppance should *associate* with the sin itself. IOW that the > kind of comeuppance I describe in DD's killing wouldn't "fit" > the "crime" of his treatment of Harry and Neville. zgirnius: First, I agree 100% that if Snape is DDM, he will have suffered enough for my taste by the end of Book 7. But I have been considering the 'karmicness' or lack thereof in what happened to (assumed) DDM! Snape at the end of HBP. And asking myself, in what ways might Book 6 have been different, if only Harry and Snape had a distant but cordial student-teacher relationship instead of the mess that Snape has created (largely on his own)? Snape and Dumbledore are sitting on one 'piece of the puzzle', that Draco's assignment is to kill DD. Harry is sitting on two different 'pieces', that Draco is using something from B&B in his 'mystery' task, and that whatever that is, it involves lots of time spent in the Room of Requirement. If we buy that the poisonous nature of the Snape/Harry relationship is at the root of the failure of all parties to work together to solve the puzzle, then Snape IS put in his position as a consequence of his behavior towards Harry. Further, presumably Dumbledore's death is not the end goal of Snape and Dumbledore. Yes, it did achieve some immediate goals, but I presume there was more to it (establishing Snape's DE credentials more firmly for some purpose). In which case, almost certainly, Snape is going to want to help Harry in some way. Which will be a huge problem for Snape in Book 7, because of the poisoned state of the relationship even before the killing of Dumbledore. It has been oft suggested onlist that Snape could prove his loyalty to Harry by some spectacular (possibly suicidally so) action, but that would hardly be his first choice. The perceived necessity of such an action is linked directly to Snape's past behavior towards Harry. Or JKR might opt for some sort of confrontation between the two. But it is one in which Harry should (IMO) have the upper hand. While Harry might in the cold light of reason need Snape's help (of whatever sort) this is not the way Harry thinks or acts. He is much more likely to turn any assistance from that quarter down flat. (And whose fault is that...?) Which means Snape would need to convince Harry of his sincerity on an emotional level, because that is the way Harry operates. I cannot imagine anything Snape would less like to do, personally. From bboyminn at yahoo.com Fri Jan 6 18:44:27 2006 From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Fri, 06 Jan 2006 18:44:27 -0000 Subject: Special treatment - yes or no In-Reply-To: <20060105232956.29439.qmail@web86206.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146020 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Irene Mikhlin wrote: > > Before I start the long list of the instances where I > think Hogwarts authorities provided special treatment > either for Harry, or Gryffindor in general, a disclaimer: > > You don't need to refute it with the claims that Harry > is a nice kid who didn't ask for special treatment, but > deserves it all anyway. Meta-arguments about this treatment > to be necessary for plot reasons also miss the point. > > The point of the exercise is to demonstrate that other > houses who don't have an insider information about Harry's > character or the broader context of the fight with Voldemort) > have a good reason to perceive Harry as Headmaster's pet. > Have you noticed that he is not very popular with > Hufflepuff and Ravenclaw either, at least until book 6? > They are very quick to believe the worst of him. > > Now to the list. > > ...edited list ... > > Irene bboyminn: I will respond in general rather than point-by-point; I agree and disagree. There now, isn't that better ;). Your disclaimer makes a very good point, that other Houses aren't dealing with all the information. As the series goes on, we see that most of the BIG Incidences are either explained by rampant rumors or by a quick mention in the Leaving Feast speech by Dumbledore. That creates plenty of room in the other Houses for exagerated rumors and unfounded speculation, and that certainly works against Harry. So, on your central point that, in the view of the other Houses, Harry seems to get special treatment. In fact, even Ron expresses that Harry 'always gets away with stuff'. So, no argument on that point. But on the point of rule breaking and special treatment in general, I do take issue. To many people (though perhaps not you) argue that Harry is always getting away with things that they think other student would never get away with. They tend to be 'moral absolutests'. They tend to take a very 'Percy' view of the rules, and make the assumption that rules are absolute and can never be broken. One might say that 'the Rules are the Law'. But history consistently proves them wrong on that point. There are times when the right, just, and morally correct thing to do is to buck the system and disobey the rules. It seems clear that Dumbledore recognises this. He understands that rule are general guidelines for a cooperative society. Without rules as guidelines for expected and excepted behavior, we would have anarchy and chaos. But again rules are not absolute. Regime become corrupt. Laws and rules are made for self-serving reasons rather than the greater good or social order. We certainly see this in Fudge and Umbridge's actions in OotP. There are times when the moral and just thing to do, is for citizens to disobey the rules in order to correct corrupt systems and restore order in the name of justice and common good. But enough of this sermonizing. Does Harry get special treatment? Yes, but, like it or not, Harry is a special person and Dumbledore more than anyone knows it. Harry has a heavy burdenous fate weighing on him. He has a dark and dangerous destiny that is vital to the fate of the wizard world. That certainly makes him special. In light of all this, we see that for routine infractions, Harry is punished or not punished roughly in proportion to what we would expect in any school. Yes, there are exception, but we have no reason to believe that those same exceptions wouldn't be applied to other students under similar circumstances. In real life, amoung intelligent civilized people, rules are tempered with mercy and understanding. Even in a court of law, where rule seem their most absolute, judges and procecutors will take extenuating circumstances into account. So, the fact that Harry is let off for certain rountine violation is not that big a deal. As I said, we could expect a similar leniency for other student under similar circumstances. In the big incidences, where Harry goes to save the Stone, or to rescue Ron from Sirius, or to rescue Ginny from Voldemort's diary, or to rescue Sirius from Voldemort; I think we have special circumstances. We have situations that are, without a doubt in my mind, the very moral exceptions to the rules that are necessary in a free society. In these instances, Harry is not acting for his personal gain, or out of some petty desire to 'make mischief'. He is acting selflessly, at great risk to himself, and in the strong interest in the welfare of other people. That is brave and noble and necessary, and reflects the very essense of the best Gryffindor qualities, and Harry is rewarded for his selfless bravery and actions in the interest of others, just as he should be. The moral absolutest, need to understand that there really are times when moral imperitive overrides the rules. Back to your main point, certainly the other Houses misunderstand Harry, and they do so because of a lack of detailed knowledge of various major incidences. In some cases, they view Harry more favorably because of this scant knowledge, though more often, the bear him some degree of ill will. But I think from both a authoral point of view and from a story point of view, this is necessary. Dumbledore has a very strong tendency to only give out the minimal amount of information necessary. If every student and adult in the wizard world knew the details of Harry life and his fate, it would make it very hard for him to do what he must ultimately do. Futher, it would make it very hard, if not impossible, for Harry to live anything approximating a normal life. Even now while the wizard world believes or at least suspect that Harry is the 'Chosen One', his life is difficult, but if they had known for a fact that information from the time of Voldemort's original defeat, Harry life would have been impossible and impractical. So, I think Dumbledore chose wisely. Better to have a few fellow students suspicious or envious of Harry, than to have the world pestering him and interferring where ever he goes. Just because people WANT to know, doesn't mean they NEED to know. Just because I want to know the intimate details of the life of "Brad" or "Tom", that doesn't mean I need to know nor that it is any of my business at all. Still enquiring minds want to know. Just a few thoughts. Steve/bboyminn From belviso at attglobal.net Fri Jan 6 19:45:47 2006 From: belviso at attglobal.net (sistermagpie) Date: Fri, 06 Jan 2006 19:45:47 -0000 Subject: Special treatment - yes or no/Rules In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146021 > Chewie now: > Do you not think that if the points in the end of term feast, > awarded to the Gryfs., were given out prior to the end of term that some teacher *caugh- SNAPE -caugh* would have found a way to take them away again? Magpie: No, I don't, because he would not have had a chance to do that and the other teachers would have hardly allowed a jillion points taken away from Gryffindor right after Dumbledore's big award go by unchallenged. Give the other teachers and Dumbledore a little credit! I still think DD's motivation is surprising Harry and little else. > Chewie now: It has nothing to do with the > points being awarded fairly throughout the year or not. They may > have been, or may not. It does not matter. Magpie: There I agree--that was my point. Valky: :) The banners show that their win was anticipated to be announced and made official, or else why was DD entitled to give points prior to the announcement. And by the same token as you said, Gryffindors win was fair because *they* won, was it not? Magpie: Yes, I did not ever suggest that the Gryffindors winning was not fair. Point taking and giving is completely arbitrary and the reasons given for their points at the end certainly qualify. I (and others) have said that allowing the hall to be decorated in Slytherin banners so that they could be taken down and replaced was a dramatic move to give a surprise to Harry unnecessarily singled out Slytherin and would undoubtedly have annoyed all the kids in that house. I think Dumbledore just wanted to make his points a surprise which involved a big PSYCH to Slytherin. Valky: I am not sure how to answer that. I don't understand what authority you have that on, Magpie. There *is* a subplot of Slytherins playing unfairly in the House cup challenge. Magpie: It is canon that Snape takes points away from Gryffindor for petty things sometimes and that we never see him take away points (or give points, that I remember) to his own house. It's also canon that in later years Slytherin is able to lose the cup despite Dumbledore not adding points at the last minute without Snape changing. The Draco examples you give are all Draco trying to get Harry in trouble, but they don't count as cheating in the contest (especially the ones that involve no points one way or the other). Draco may have told on Harry and tempted him to break the rules so he'd get caught but Harry's points lost for being out of bed are perfectly fair if he is out of bed. A lot of people hated Richard Hatch who won the first Survivor for the way he played, but he wasn't cheating. And I'm sure every single student mutters about how students in other houses don't get points taken away as much as their house does. Gryffindor always sees itself as the most virtuous and the most victimized by unfair calls. That's not an objective observation. Valky: All said, Draco did set out that night with the full intention to earn Slytherin a lead in the House cup by being a rotten little snitch, right? And he managed it. He could have chosen to do something great instead, and if he had done then I'd be with you that Slytherin should have retained their win. Magpie: Whether Draco was primarily interested in points or not what he did still isn't cheating. Pointing out somebody else breaking the rules is perfectly within the rules of the contest. You've made it clear that you think his actions mean the Gryffindors *deserve* to win more because they're better people doing better things, but I have never said that Slytherin should win, especially not based on their personal characters. Dumbledore's gesture with the banners and Gryffindor winning are not dependent on each other. Valky: There are enough references to the difference between MacGonagall and Snape. MacGonagall is going to give fair ones to anyone that impresses her and take fair points from thos who do wrong, end of story. Snape OTOH is going to give points as he sees fit and take points only from rivals. Thats how the story goes. It's pretty obvious that there is ill-gotten points in Slytherins Hourglass and undeserved points taken from Gryffindors. Magpie: And yet McGonagall and Snape seem to enjoy a friendly rivalry with each other. If Snape is just cheating I don't think that would be the case. I think they're both awarding and taking points based on their own values. I also don't think we have any canon of Snape awarding points to Slytherins (the man loves to TAKE points). I'm sure it's "pretty obvious" to many other students that there are ill- gotten points in Gryffindor's hourglass (perhaps many due to being starstruck about Harry) and undeserved ones taken from their own glass (I'm sure Hufflepuff has thought that a lot, but that's jmo). Occasionally teachers have been known to give points to Harry for handing over a watering can as a cover for something else. Teachers are allowed to give points because they think somebody's great or they think somebody else is a jerk. I see no reason to believe that it doesn't even out in the end every time (in fact, one of the things that signals the return to normalcy in OotP is that the hourglass is more even again). Valky: However, I disagree that it can be called a veiled criticism at all, it was more like holding up a mirror to them, allowing them, if they so will, to question heir own methods. Magpie: No, it isn't like holding up a mirror to them in the least. Dumbledore says, "Well done, Slytherin," in acknowledgement of the points they've won, and then turns to award more points to Gryffindor. To hold up a mirror to them he'd probably be looking at them and be focused on them. Of course Dumbledore is praising the actions of Harry & Co. above the everyday things that earn school points, but that doesn't translate into saying Slytherin is being shamed for things they've done during the book. If Ravenclaw won I think DD would have done exactly the same thing and used the exact same words, "Yes, well done, Ravenclaw, but there are some more points to tally up..." The Slytherins have been brushed aside (which is humiliating), not held up for criticism. The spotlight is not on them at all, imo. Steve: To many people (though perhaps not you) argue that Harry is always getting away with things that they think other student would never get away with. They tend to be 'moral absolutests'. They tend to take a very 'Percy' view of the rules, and make the assumption that rules are absolute and can never be broken. Magpie: Actually, many people who feel Harry is always getting away with things are *not* moral absolutists or anything like Percy but are accused of such perhaps because it would make things easier if they were just neurotic that way. But really many people who support the idea that sometimes rules should be broken still have trouble with rule-breaking in the books. In order to understand the concept of when it's necessary to break the rules, you must respect and understand when rules are a good and necessary thing, and that concept is rarely if ever presented because not caring about rules at all often seems to be considered a virtue in itself. (A character might, for instance, keep a genuine moral qualm to himself to avoid "sounding like Percy.) There's a huge grey area between the two extremes, and sometimes JKR falls just further to one side. I have come to the conclusion now that perhaps the reason for this is that JKR sees it as important for people to always make choices based on what they want to do, right or wrong, and never based on something outside of themselves. The DEs are all sort of childish in their dependence on Voldemort to tell them right and wrong. So I think Rowling just may see it as important as everyone to feel above the rules at times--by which I don't mean they should demand special treatment, but that her people always make choices based on what they want and not what someone else thinks is right. Hermione is never so silly sounding as when she's saying people should do something just because it's a rule, and I can't remember her ever explaining the rule to show that she sees the point of it and therefore supports it, or explain school rules in themselves as something that are there for logical reasons. (Wait, I'm wrong--she explains why she handed over the Firebolt and it's one of the only times her standing up for the rules is defended in canon since it comes down to protecting Harry.) Even Lupin only comes to say that Dumbledore's rules about his behavior at school were to protect *him* instead of emphasizing that his breaking those rules put others in danger. -m From bboyminn at yahoo.com Fri Jan 6 20:05:28 2006 From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Fri, 06 Jan 2006 20:05:28 -0000 Subject: Special treatment - yes or no In-Reply-To: <01ca01c61283$d5f27410$2d6c400c@Spot> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146022 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Magpie" wrote: > > Magpie: > > No, I emphasized that they [Slytherin] had officially won the > contest (which is why the banners are hanging), and that the > winning was fair because they won. There's no subplot about a > fixed house contest suddenly being made fair. ...edited... bboyminn: Even though you have somewhat established it in other posts, I think this is the flaw in your assumption. The game was not over; Slytherin has NOT won. The game isn't over until the final buzzer sounds, and the final buzzer hadn't sounded yet. School was still in session, points could still be awared for good behavior and taken for bad behavior. So, Slytherin came into the Leaving Feast with a strong lead and the /assumption/ that they had won. This logical and reasonable /assumption/ was re-enforced by the fact that there colors were flying. Further, at that point in time, it was logical for their colors to be flying on the /assumption/ that their strong lead made them the clear winner. However, Dumbledore, as well as all the other professors, were well within their rights, to my way of thinking, in awarding and taking points at that time. So, in my view, the game wasn't over, and we and they had only assumed who the winner would be. Was Slytherin VERY disappointed? They certainly were, and justifiably so. But did you, or they, really expect to live their lives without disappointment? If they, or you, did then you both have a very unrealistic view of life, and with that supposed attitude, will certainly be extremely disappointed in your life; consistently and miserably disappointed. Did Harry break the rules? Yes. But the good that came out of it far out weighed the breaking of the rules. Rules are meant to create an orderly and cooperative society, but those particular rules were not etched in stone when Moses went up the mountain. They are just school rules, the fate of the world doesn't hinge on them. Harry saved (or at least, helped save) one of the most precious artifacts in the wizard world. There is only one known Philosopher's Stone in existence, and Harry saved it from being captured by the most dangerous and notorious criminal who ever lived. That is worth far more in value than the detriment of being out past curfew. Ron and Hermione aided Harry tremendously in achieving this goal, and certainly deserved their share of points for their actions. Without their help, Harry would have never succeeded in a task that the world desperately needed him to succeed at. With Ron and Hemione's help Harry saved the Stone and prevented Voldemort from gaining power. I don't know about you, but that certainly carries far more weight than the violation of a few petty school rules. Harry, Ron, Hermione, and Neville all deserved those point for the brave, SELFLESS, and heroic actions they took, not on their own behalf or in their own interest, but in the interest of the wizard world and their fellow students. Certainly you must see that selfless heroism like that is worth far more than a few correct answers in class and a few won Quidditch games. So, just before the 'final buzzer' Harry and friends scored a few last minute points, that's the nature of the game. Sometimes you win and sometimes you lose, and sometimes victory is snatch away by a last minute unexpected goal. THAT'S LIFE, get over it. Just trying to establish some perspective. Steve/bboyminn From rdoliver30 at yahoo.com Fri Jan 6 19:16:52 2006 From: rdoliver30 at yahoo.com (lupinlore) Date: Fri, 06 Jan 2006 19:16:52 -0000 Subject: Snape again/Love and Vengeance/Ending In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146024 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "zgirnius" wrote: > If we buy > that the poisonous nature of the Snape/Harry relationship is at the > root of the failure of all parties to work together to solve the > puzzle, then Snape IS put in his position as a consequence of his > behavior towards Harry. Yes, that would indeed help to meet the requirements of both positions. I personally would find DDM!Snape incredibly silly and unbelievable, but this would be a way of addressing both the DDM! and karmic aspects. But as you say, how to bring all that out? It does seem that a confrontation of some sort is in store. Will it be before or after the vanquishing of Voldemort? Certainly Harry will be in a stronger position after the vanquishing. We have, most of us, assumed that he must deal with Snape in some way before dealing with Voldy, but maybe not. Perhaps the confrontation will come after -- and that would certainly mean Harry would have the upper hand. Perhaps Snape is trying to avoid Azkaban and needs to explain himself to Harry? Like you say, Snape having to reach Harry on an emotional level is something he would deeply hate to do, and if he has to do it from a position of weakness, then the demands of karmic payback would be nicely satisfied. Of course, this posits a live Snape, which seems a stretch. His entire character is associated with the past, and his demise seems the inevitable end of his story arc once the issues of the past are revealed and settled. Also, how could he ever fit into wizarding society again, having killed Dumbledore -- even if he is DDM, silly and unbelievable as that would be? Lupinlore From kchuplis at alltel.net Fri Jan 6 20:17:26 2006 From: kchuplis at alltel.net (kchuplis) Date: Fri, 06 Jan 2006 20:17:26 -0000 Subject: Want or need/Rules In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146025 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "sistermagpie" wrote: > I have come to the conclusion now that perhaps the reason for this > is that JKR sees it as important for people to always make choices > based on what they want to do, right or wrong, and never based on > something outside of themselves. Can you expound on this theory? To me what you said is that JKR is advising people just always do whatever they want (which intimates that it doesn't matter to her if it causes hurt or not) but I don't *think* that is really what you mean to say. >The DEs are all sort of childish > in their dependence on Voldemort to tell them right and wrong. I, at least, haven't seen enough of the DE's to say for sure, but I don't see Voldemort as setting up a bunch of rules. There seems to be only one rule and that is "The only rule is "make me happy"". That's it. There are many ways to break that rule, but that really appears to be the only one and is pretty much the standard when it comes to meglomanical dictatorships. I don't see DE's as craving to be told what is right and wrong so much as craving to keep on the good side of the one they think has the most power. >So I > think Rowling just may see it as important as everyone to feel above > the rules at times--by which I don't mean they should demand special > treatment, but that her people always make choices based on what > they want and not what someone else thinks is right. Do you really mean "what they want" as opposed to "what they see as right"? JKR aspousing a view of everyone should do what they want as opposed to what someone else thinks as right seems entirely opposite what I see when reading the books. Most of the time, I don't think Harry, at least, wants to do half of what he does. He feels compelled to do it however. Sometimes those two, want and need converge, but often, they seem to not be in line at all. To me, that is a difference. kchuplis From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Fri Jan 6 20:23:45 2006 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Fri, 06 Jan 2006 20:23:45 -0000 Subject: Lessons in the book WAS:Points awarded to Trio in PS/SS In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146026 > Chris: > > The lessons the books teach are good and should be > taught, but they are not taught in a way that the > lessons can be used. Alla: I disagree. I think the lessons are there in the perfect form - not preachy or anything, just making young people think for themselves and not just blindly follow the rules, if their inner sense of what is right and wrong tells them that rules ARE wrong. IMO of course. Chris: > It's not OK for children to ignore adults and do what > they want anyway. Harry and Ron had Lockhart at their > mercy and should have gone to a teacher for help, not > what they did. Alla: They DID go to teacher for help and they received no help from Lockhart himself. If they were trying to look for another teacher, I think Ginny would have been dead. IMO JKR disagrees with you here and thinks that "saving life, even one life" counts the most. JMO obviously. Chris: > It's certainly not OK to buck the justice system, even > if it is flawed, just to save 1 or 2 lives. Harry > should have been fighting the ministry to present the > truth of Sirius. Truth serum, non-cheating quills, > and the pensives are all ways Harry could have told > the truth. Instead he aided an escaped convict, > keeping him hidden when he could have been freed. Alla: Hmmmm, I certainly cannot get into JKR's head, but I think that she is of the opinion that corrupted justice system should be fought in any way possible and Dumbledore seems to think so, since he is the one who sends Harry and Hermione on a mission. And again, Ministry was ready to give Sirius a kiss, NOT to listen to anybody. I think here again we see that a lot of things are OK in order to save even one or two lives. I am very much in agreement with those who argued that JKR promotes noble individuals fighting corrupted system by any means necessary. As long as those means are not corrupted of course. JMO, Alla From aniakampka at yahoo.ca Fri Jan 6 12:06:50 2006 From: aniakampka at yahoo.ca (ania kampka) Date: Fri, 6 Jan 2006 07:06:50 -0500 (EST) Subject: Other ways to destroy Voldemort In-Reply-To: <79232887.20060106000328@mindspring.com> Message-ID: <20060106120650.46539.qmail@web50111.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 146027 allies426 wrote: > I do not believe for a second that Harry will "kill" > Voldemort or even attempt an Avada Kedavra. Luckdragon wrote: > I believe the best way to Vanquish LV is to rid him of his > powers and leave him as a completely magicless muggle or > squib. Since Power seems to be what is most important to LV > and his belief that muggles are inferior this would be a fate > worse than death for him. Dave: > Perhaps then LV, like Hitler, would commit suicide -- This > may be one way "one must die at the hand of "the other" > without Harry actually having to commit murder. How foolish of me not to think of THIS : priori incantatem is the way, imo, LV will they. Rowling didn't let us see what would happen with Harry or Voldy if one of them prevailed in the duel in GoF. I think priori incatatem will happen again and this time Harry will be victorious. It's so simple. When HP distroys all Horcruxes Voldy will be weak and Harry's moral strength is increasing through all the books and of course love for Ginny is his another strength. I think he can win in this way. On the other way I CAN imagine Harry killing LV- this would leave him at the end of Potterverse as a complicated and morally self-destroyed person, it would be his sacrifice- losing his innocence. "aniakampka" From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Fri Jan 6 20:40:24 2006 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Fri, 06 Jan 2006 20:40:24 -0000 Subject: Spinner's End In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146028 fuzz876i wrote: > While rereading the HBP for the fourth time I caught something else: Snape offered to tell Voldemort that Wormtail wanted more dangerous jobs because Wormtail didn't like having to wait on Snape but this chapter let us know that Snape really was still a death eater and not one of Dumbledore's men as thought. Carol responds: I don't think we can draw any such definite conclusion from this interesting tidbit, which is of a piece with the rest of "Spinner's End" in showing us Snape as he speaks and acts with the Death Eaters, minus Harry's perspective but still viewed from the outside. IOW, we're not privy to his thoughts, and we don't know what's real and what's an act or what his motives are (other than survival and getting Bella to believe that he's a loyal supporter of LV, which Narcissa already believes, whether he really is or not). What this scene shows, IMO, is that Snape (who has clearly given Voldemort much the same version of events that he gives Bella here) either has or thinks he has persuaded the Dark Lord that neither his absence from the graveyard nor his thwarting of Quirrell meant that he had "left [Voldemort] forever." I personally believe that Snape has used a combination of truths, half-truths, lies, and strategic omissions (like his sending the Order to the MoM and his saving DD from the ring Horcrux), along with highly sophisticated Occlumency, to persuade Voldemort of his loyalty, which IMO is still to Dumbledore. (If you're interested in my reasons for thinking Snape is DDM!, see my post 136474 for my preliminary interpretation of this chapter; some of my views may have changed, but it presents the general idea: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/136474 See also my infamous post 137961 on the cursed DADA position, particularly the section on Snape: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/137961) Regarding the relationship between Snape and Voldemort, Snape tells Harry during the first Occlumency lesson in OoP: "The Dark Lord, for instance, almost always knows when somebody is lying to him. Only those skilled at Occlumency are able to shut down those feelings and memories that contradict the lie, and so utter falsehoods in his presence without detection" (Am. ed. 531). I'm certain that Snape is speaking from personal experience here: As a "superb Occlumens" (Lupin's phrase), he almost certainly includes himself among the very few who can risk death by lying to Voldemort. Since he is still alive, he has reason to believe that Voldemort at least provisionally accepts his version of events. Lucius Malfoy, Voldemort's former righthand man, has failed him and landed himself in Azkaban. His most loyal supporter (not counting the soul-sucked Barty Jr.), Bellatrix, is also being punished by rejection and coldness. Clearly (as Snape makes sure before he proceeds with his answers to her questions), she is no longer close enough to LV to question him regarding any holes she might see in Snape's story or any additions he might make to it for her benefit. That leaves a vacancy that only the highly talented Snape, having convinced Voldemort of his loyalty, can fill. However, as we know, Voldemort trusts no one. Consequently, Wormtail, ostensibly placed with Snape to assist him, is also expected to spy on him. Snape's remark about not knowing why Wormtail is listening at doorways is surely tongue in cheek--he knows perfectly well what Wormtail is up to--but Bellatrix and Narcissa are too preoccupied with their own personal agenda to care (and in any case Snape has evidently prevented Wormtail from eavesdropping in this instance by using an Impervius Charm with an extra little sting that sends Wormtail scurrying upstairs). This incident nicely illustrates their relationship: Snape holds Wormtail in contempt, referring to him in the third person as "vermin" in front of the Black sisters, and orders him around; Wormtail resents being treated like a servant and tries to listen in on Snape's conversations but nevertheless serves the elf-made wine without poisoning it and leaves the room when he's ordered to do so. (That Snape puts a spell on the door as Wormtail leaves shows that he doesn't trust the shifty rat despite this reluctant obedience.) What the remark you referred to indicates to me is that Snape is using psychology on Wormtail. The ironic suggestion that Wormtail might prefer a more risky assignment and that Snape might recommend such a change to LV may be an empty threat (much like Snape's threats to expel Harry and Ron), but Wormtail can't take that chance. For the moment, until his disloyalty is conclusively proven, Snape is Voldemort's righthand man, and Wormtail quite clearly doesn't want to risk his precious life. Nor, apparently, does he want to return to Voldemort. The change in his appearance since GoF is striking: He's now nearly a hunchback, clearly from repeated Crucios or some other form of physical abuse by Voldemort. He has his silver hand, the reward for restoring Voldemort's body, but now he's essentially useless. Wormtail dreads returning to him; he'd rather endure Snape's derision than LV's cruelty. So neither this remark nor any other evidence in "Spinner's End" proves that Snape has really gone over to LV in HBP. Bellatrix certainly doubts it up until the last provision of the Unbreakable Vow (and even that doesn't prove Snape's disloyalty to DD, only that Snape is caught in a trap at least partly of his own making). All it proves is that Wormtail, like Narcissa, knows that Snape has risen to a position of prominence under Voldemort, who undoubtedly recognizes Snape's intelligence and other gifts and is in desperate need of talented servants. Whether Voldemort is convinced of his loyalty (with Wormtail placed as spy to relieve any nagging doubts) or is simply using him is unclear. So are Snape's own motives and loyalties, which even the tower scene does not reveal. I think Snape's loyalties lie with Dumbledore and that they have done so since he first began to spy for him "at great personal risk" before he was accepted as Potions teacher at Hogwarts, which in turn was before Godric's Hollow. But others think his only loyalty is to himself, or that he has actually switched his loyalties to Voldemort (which IMO would place him on a par with a pair of psychotics, Barty Jr. and Bellatrix Lestrange). We won't know until Book 7 comes out. But until then, I would argue that Snape's words to Wormtail most certainly don't prove that he is not Dumbledore's man. (Remember, he has just prevented a terrible curse from the ring Horcrux from killing Dumbledore, an odd thing for a loyal servant of Voldemort to do.) And in the all too likely event that Snape is killed in Book 7, IMO it's much more likely to be by Voldemort himself, recognizing at last that Snape is still DD's man, than by anyone on the side of Harry and the Order. Carol, noting with approval that JKR left up her website's Christmas decorations for the Twelve Days of Christmas and took them down for Epiphany (today), dutifully following tradition (whereas I'm risking bad luck by taking mine down right now, bad me!) From rdoliver30 at yahoo.com Fri Jan 6 15:39:02 2006 From: rdoliver30 at yahoo.com (lupinlore) Date: Fri, 06 Jan 2006 15:39:02 -0000 Subject: JKR's writing, plot, storyline (Re: First potions lesson/Harry getting special treatment) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146029 La Gatta wrote: > > I'm not sure whether JKR set out to write a series of > children's books and found that it had gotten away from her > (Snape goes from being the eleven-year-old's idea of a teacher > from hell to something much more complex and tragic), or > whether our view of Snape developes from book to book to match > Harry's own growing level of awareness. I think it's probably a mixture of both. I've long suspected that JKR did not have things nailed down nearly as firmly as she liked to let on. I think she definitely had a story arc in mind, and certainly plot points she wanted to get in and details of the world. But many things convince me that the development of canon has been a great deal more fluid than she commonly likes to indicate. For one thing, both GoF and, especially, OOTP seemed to suffer from the fact that they were based around plot points rather than storylines. That is she had definite things she wanted to happen or be revealed in fifth and sixth year, but not really a storyline in place to contain them. Similarly large sections of GoF had the smell of being written in reaction to various questions/issues raised by groups in the fandom. And parts of GoF seemed to pretty directly repeal (or at least sweep under the rug) parts of OOTP. I think JKR did let the story get away from her at some key points, and we have seen the effects of that. I also think, as I've said before, that she is sometimes quite naive about the way things come across to readers. Places where she thinks her messages/purposes/reasons are perfectly clear bring forth reaction that she obviously has not anticipated, although she probably should have. The shipping examples are obvious. To take another case, the weariness with which she answered questions about why Sirius Black died, combined with a certain snappishness that is quite different than her usual public demeanor, seems to indicate that she was blindsided by the reaction and criticism she received on that point -- an opinion that is reinforced by the speed with which she disposed of the whole issue in GoF, like a harried housewife dumping a burned pot roast into the outside garbage before it smells up the house. The change in Dumbledore and his demeanor between the infamous speech at the end of OOTP and the third chapter of GoF is another example. I also think that she did not fully expect the effects of the genre shift we have seen. One workable definition of "genre" is that it is the set of conventions that determines the questions appropriate to ask of a story. In the first book we are definitely in the genre of a fairy tale. By GoF we are into melodrama/fantasy adventure. In a fairy tale, for instance, the hero's background is taken for granted and wizards are always inscrutable, so Dumbledore's decisions with regard to the Dursleys are not appropriate fodder for questions. In a melodrama or adventure story, on the other hand, such questions are very important and legitimate. In other words, as the HP saga moved in genre, new questions were admitted that made a lot of what had gone before very problematic. I don't think JKR fully anticipated a lot of the effects of this shift, and much of what we have seen lately arises from her scramble to deal with it. Lupinlore From belviso at attglobal.net Fri Jan 6 21:08:20 2006 From: belviso at attglobal.net (sistermagpie) Date: Fri, 06 Jan 2006 21:08:20 -0000 Subject: Special treatment - yes or no In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146030 > bboyminn: > > Even though you have somewhat established it in other posts, I think this is the flaw in your assumption. The game was not over; Slytherin has NOT won. The game isn't over until the final buzzer sounds, and the final buzzer hadn't sounded yet. School was still in session, points could still be awared for good behavior and taken for bad > behavior. Magpie: Yes, the game wasn't *truly* won because Dumbledore gave out more points. I agree. But the house is decorated in Slytherin colors to make it LOOK like it was over and they won so that they'd have more egg on their face. The *assumption* is the whole point of the bait and switch. As I said in other posts, I don't challenge Dumbledore's right to award points to Gryffindor or for Gryffindor to win. I am saying that Dumbledore intentionally psyched everyone out to make more of a surprise for Harry and that involved Slytherin in a way which was unnecessary. Steve: > Was Slytherin VERY disappointed? They certainly were, and justifiably > so. But did you, or they, really expect to live their lives without > disappointment? Magpie: Err...this is coming way out of left field for me. Of course they should expect to live their lives with disappointment--and will throughout the series. (Just like Harry has to suffer a run-of-the- mill case of getting passed over for distinction with his Prefect badge...though he's got a bunch of adults telling him he should have gotten it or that it's cooler to be passed over, and then at the end of the year Dumbledore apologizes to him about it and assures him he really was the best anyway.) The whole angle of Slytherins, me and disappointment is pretty much a strawman ably knocked down with a bracing lecture about how disappointment builds character. I have not only never suggested that Slytherin should get the cup back, I have said more than once that I consider Gryffindor the winner. I already agree that everyone needs to learn to live with disappointment and would hardly argue otherwise. They can be disappointed without the banner switch. Magpie: > I have come to the conclusion now that perhaps the reason for this > is that JKR sees it as important for people to always make choices > based on what they want to do, right or wrong, and never based on > something outside of themselves. kchuplis: Can you expound on this theory? To me what you said is that JKR is advising people just always do whatever they want (which intimates that it doesn't matter to her if it causes hurt or not) but I don't *think* that is really what you mean to say. Magpie: Sorry, I didn't make it very clear. I didn't mean that people should do whatever they want in terms of just making choices based on their personal pleasure. I meant more to suggest that they know they are making choices based on what *they* think is right and wrong, or what they are comfortable doing rather than following what someone else says to do. (I didn't say "based on what's right and wrong" because sometimes characters choose something that's not exactly right but something they can live with.) It's true Voldemort does not really seem to offer any sort of ethics at all. What I meant was more that the DEs fight amongst themselves to see who's most in his favor--that's what he offers (as you said). It's a very childish way to go through life where "good" is stuff that makes Voldemort (or anyone else) pleased with you or reward you. He seems to be at the center of most of the stuff they do because he is the great and powerful one who's going to fix things or make others pay or elevate them. You're right with how you described it, imo, that right and wrong don't matter, what matters is what Voldemort thinks because that leads to praise and favor. The one DE who seems to mostly avoid being described in a childlike way (Snape and Peter have their moments) is Lucius Malfoy, and I think that's because he's needed to stand as a father figure to Draco (who does struggle with childishness, especially in the Tower). So I get the feeling that JKR may associate independence and not being a follower with virtue in itself. James was a good man, but he was no goody-two-shoes. That, perhaps, makes it more clear that he's good because he believes in what he's doing, if that makes sense. Characters who long for an authority figure to validate them always seem to be in more danger morally in the series, imo, whether it's Percy with "Mr. Crouch says..." or Draco with, "My father says..." In a way they separate themselves from their own actions because they're just leaving it up to the smarter person. (That's why I think that while we don't know if it will result in anything, it is a good thing for Draco's character that he is cut off from, betrayed by or rejects all his former authorities.) There are times when the characters choose what they want to do rather than what is right--James with Snape, for instance. But I think those times when they make the wrong decision maybe are meant to show that when they choose to do the right thing it's all their decision too. So I feel like maybe she's saying it's good to be independent and decide for yourself what's right and wrong, but that doesn't always mean you'll make the correct decision. -m From zgirnius at yahoo.com Fri Jan 6 21:43:51 2006 From: zgirnius at yahoo.com (zgirnius) Date: Fri, 06 Jan 2006 21:43:51 -0000 Subject: Snape again/Love and Vengeance/Ending In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146031 lupinlore wrote: > It does seem that a confrontation of some sort is in store. Will it > be before or after the vanquishing of Voldemort? Certainly Harry will > be in a stronger position after the vanquishing. We have, most of us, > assumed that he must deal with Snape in some way before dealing with > Voldy, but maybe not. Perhaps the confrontation will come after -- > and that would certainly mean Harry would have the upper hand. > Perhaps Snape is trying to avoid Azkaban and needs to explain himself > to Harry? zgirnius: Like you, I doubt that Snape will still be hanging about after the defeat of Voldemort. Which is why I would imagine that the confrontation will take place before the final Harry/Voldemort confrontation. My sense of Snape's character is that Harry will have the upper hand in such a confrontation. Even though he is not yet The Man Who Defeated Voldemort, and cannot offer a tangible benefit such as a free pass out of Azkaban to Snape in exchange for his apology/explanation/what have you. Because Harry has the power to deny Snape what I believe he wants most-a role in the defeat of Voldemort. And, as I am convinced he was truly not happy about killing Dumbledore, he will only be wanting this more in Book 7. Aside from a suicidal 'trojan horse' sort of gesture like saving a mamber of the Trio from Voldemort/Death Eaters/whatever (which (I definitely see as an option as well, though I would prefer the confrontation), the most likely role Snape can hope to play would be to provide the stray tidbit of useful information he might pick up in the Death Eater camp. But only if he can share it with Harry and be believed. Which, of course, he will not be unless he can overcome the hate he himself has helped to create and foster in Harry. I would find this more interesting than the 'after the fall' scenario for a number of reasons. First, the stakes. After, Harry would not really be getting anything out of the deal except knowledge and emotional satisfaction. But before, he could also be getting some valuable assistance that would allow him and the plot to move on to the next adventure. And JKR could create suspense as to whether this assistance will be accepted or not. And if it is, whether or not it is genuine... Second, it would be a more interesting test for Harry's character, and a more impressive act of mercy before than after. It is easier to be a 'nice guy' once you have won and are receiving everyone's accolades. And finally, I like DDM! mostly for the redemption story that it would be (assuming it holds...) If in the end Snape makes up with Harry in order to stay out of Azkaban it cheapens the gesture. (Though would certainly be a reasonable way to give OFH! Snape his karmic comeuppance for his treatment of Harry.) From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Fri Jan 6 21:43:58 2006 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Fri, 06 Jan 2006 21:43:58 -0000 Subject: last minute points was Re: First potions lesson/Harry getting special treatment In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146032 Valky wrote: > LOL! You and me both, then because I see your argument building > off the assumption that the Slytherins *deserved* that win in PS/SS > which would in turn assume that they worked hard to legally and > rightfully gain every single point awarded them and we know > unequivocally that they didn't. Gryffindor lost 150 points that was > rightfully earned because Draco deliberately schemed to ensure that > they did lose those points. Carol responds: Interesting. I was thinking that it was a too-convenient coincidence that Gryffindor was behind by 150 points and Dumbledore assigned exactly 50 points each to HRH for their actions in saving the Sorceror's Stone from Quirrel!mort, but your observation throws a new light on DD'ss motivation and logic. Without taking a position on whether the Slytherins deserved most of their points or not (and we really haven't seen them awarded any undeservingly, have we?), I can see why DD would want to add exactly 150 points back in (with Neville as the tie breaker after that). I do think, along with many other posters, that the Slytherins must have felt cheated by having the points awarded just at that time, with the Slytherin hangings in place and the points seemingly totaled, but at least I can understand why DD assigned exactly the number of points needed to make Gryffindor even with Slytherin before adding Neville's ten. He was simply restoring the points that Draco had caused Gryffindor to lose. (Then again, Draco lost points for Slytherin, too, so maybe it's not quite as fair as it seems.) Carol, not really liking DD's timing but at least seeing the point total as fair if the 150 points Draco cost HRH is accurate (I didn't check, but I'll bet Valky did!) From gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk Fri Jan 6 22:12:36 2006 From: gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk (Geoff Bannister) Date: Fri, 06 Jan 2006 22:12:36 -0000 Subject: last minute points was Re: First potions lesson/Harry getting special treatment In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146033 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "justcarol67" wrote: Carol: not really liking DD's timing but at least seeing the point > total as fair if the 150 points Draco cost HRH is accurate (I didn't > check, but I'll bet Valky did!) Geoff: Trouble is, being a complete and utter pedant, the difference was 160. Gryffindor had 312, Slytherin 472. The allocation of points to Ron, Hermione and Harry was 50:50:60. (PS "the Man with Two Faces" pp. 220-21 UK edition) From lindseyharrisst at hotmail.com Fri Jan 6 22:22:17 2006 From: lindseyharrisst at hotmail.com (lindseyharrisst) Date: Fri, 06 Jan 2006 22:22:17 -0000 Subject: Let's talk about Lupin Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146034 I did ask this when the book had only just come out an ddidn't get much response (I imagine because the death issue and snape's loyalty were the most striking points) - What does the group think of the Lupin shipping in HBP? I contend that it is... a. not foreshadowed or calculable, even in retrospect, contrary to most things in the books, esp. shipping b. because it is a narrative afterthought it was not well thought out, what good could Lupin and Tonks see in each other (over being with someone else, or alone)? c. does it seem in chracter for Lupin to fall in love (and with Tonks)? d. Do you think it's authentic love on his or her part? I confess to having a belief he should be with another, but that aside, I just don't see the point. Snapesangel (who thinks JK now has more shipping than P&O, and it's not a good thing) From willsonkmom at msn.com Fri Jan 6 22:21:27 2006 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Fri, 06 Jan 2006 22:21:27 -0000 Subject: last minute points was Re: First potions lesson/Harry getting special treatment In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146035 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "justcarol67" wrote: > > Valky wrote: snip Gryffindor lost 150 points that was > > rightfully earned because Draco deliberately schemed to ensure that > > they did lose those points. > > Carol responds: He was simply restoring > the points that Draco had caused Gryffindor to lose. (Then again, > Draco lost points for Slytherin, too, so maybe it's not quite as fair > as it seems.) Potioncat: I'm going to look at this a slightly different way. Gryffindor lost 150 points because McGonagall thought they were out of bounds late at night and playing a trick on Draco. They were really out of bounds to help Hagrid and Norbert. I'm going to speculate, that by the time of the feast, (If not sooner) DD knows all about the dragon. I think his awarding points for courage also counters the points they lost while doing a good deed. Not that "Draco caused them to lose points, so I'll repay the kids" but rather "The kids lost points while doing a good deed, and I will repay them now." Although the 150 and 10 points were certainly earned. He would most likely think they deserved points for helping Hagrid in such a courageous way...but certainly could not reward them for it. From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Fri Jan 6 22:34:26 2006 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Fri, 06 Jan 2006 22:34:26 -0000 Subject: Harry's celebrity status (Was: Special treatment ) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146036 Carol writes: Please note that I've changed the subject line and am not discussing whether Harry received or deserved special treatment. Alla wrote: > I completely disagree. Harry indeed got off without "Snape style" > punishment, IMO. And I so loved Remus for coming just on time. Remus > punished Harry and punished him VERY effectively IMO. So what if it > was just a lecture? It WORKED on Harry and that is what matters IMO. > Punishment should help student to recognize that his behavior was > wrong and not to do it again, punishment should not needlessly > embarrass student, making him be afraid for the life of his pet or > being humiliated in front of his peers (and yeah, before you ask, I > will say it again - that Mcgonagall did that to Neville was WRONG, > very WRONG) Carol responds: Or perhaps there's a difference between punishment (detentions and point deductions) and discipline (teaching a lesson in hopes that the student will employ self-discipline next time)? Alla wrote: Harry's celebrity status is mainly negative one IMO and > while Draco may think that it is cool to be in the newspaper,etc, > there is no escape from FACT ( IMO of course) that Harry is a > celebrity because he is marked either for death or for killing > someone ( well, we don't know how that will play out of course, but > that is how the situation stands right now, right? - to kill or be > killed) and I honestly don't see ANY reason to wish for being in > Harry's skin. > > I am not even saying that being celebrity does not have its perks, > but IMO "Harry as a celebrity" is a situation which every normal > person would not want to be in, unless such person has a death wish > of course. Carol responds: Again, please note that I'm not discussing special treatment here. I simply want to respond to these remarks on Harry's status as a celebrity. If I'm not mistaken, Harry's celebrity status results from surviving the attack at Godric's Hollow. He's the Boy Who Lived, the boy with the famous scar. He's already a celebrity before he (re)enters the WW because of events beyond his control that occurred when he was fifteen months old. His celebrity status *at Hogwarts* is enhanced by his performance on the Quidditch field and possibly to some extent by his defeat of Quirrel and his saving of Ginny in SS/PS and CoS (it seems clear that the students don't know the whole story in either case). The events in PoA neither add to nor detract from his celebrity status, but in GoF his celebrity status is enhanced in the WW at large by his selection as the fourth Hogwarts champion and the articles that Rita Skeeter writes for the Daily Prophet. True, these tasks involve danger, but no more for the youngest champion than for the others (until he and Cedric grab the portkey and end up in the graveyard with LV and Wormtail, hardly an event that he or his fans or even DD anticipated). In OoP, he's that mad boy who has fits, suffers delusions, and claims that his scar hurts, a celebrity in the sense that he's in the papers, but not because he's Voldemort's destined nemesis or because he's in danger of murdering or being murdered. Almost no one knows about the prophecy; even fewer know its full wording. Even Harry himself is unaware of it until the end of OoP. Few people even know that Voldemort is back. In HBP, finally, Harry becomes the Chosen One as opposed to the Boy Who Lived, but even then the Prophecy is only a rumor. Not even the kids who helped Harry retrieve the Prophecy orb know what it said. They believe the Prophecy is lost. So I disagree that Harry's pre-HBP celebrity status has anything to do with his being destined to kill or be killed by Voldemort. Only a very few people, even at Hogwarts, know that he has faced Voldemort in one form or another in his first, second, and fourth years, and fewer still know the details. If they did, the DA members wouldn't be so surprised to learn that he killed a basilisk and used Expelliarmus against Voldemort (not exactly in the usual way with the usual results, but they don't even realize that he duelled LV in the graveyard). Since so few people know how dangerous Harry's life is, I don't think it's unreasonable to imagine that certain people, perhaps including Draco, do envy his celebrity status. Draco in CoS, IIRC, complains to his father that Potter is famous because of a stupid scar. In fact, he's famous because he survived an AK at Godric's Hollow. But there's no indication in the WW at large that Voldemort will return or that Harry will have to fight him. Carol, who managed to get through a whole post without once mentioning Snape (though the quoted portion does touch on him) From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Fri Jan 6 23:29:27 2006 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Fri, 06 Jan 2006 23:29:27 -0000 Subject: Harry's celebrity status and Draco's view of such and Harry's view of Draco In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146037 Carol: > Since so few people know how dangerous Harry's life is, I don't think > it's unreasonable to imagine that certain people, perhaps including > Draco, do envy his celebrity status. Draco in CoS, IIRC, complains to > his father that Potter is famous because of a stupid scar. In fact, > he's famous because he survived an AK at Godric's Hollow. But there's > no indication in the WW at large that Voldemort will return or that > Harry will have to fight him. Alla: Absolutely, it IS not unreasonable to imagine that certain people, perhaps including Draco envy it. What I was initially trying to argue though and it is I guess got lost eventually was to argue against Magpie's point that Draco's POV of Harry and Harry's POV of Draco are equally wrong. I remain convinced that Draco's POV of Harry is MUCH more wrong that Harry's view of Draco. Let me try it again and if I start rambling, please feel free to put me back on track by asking questions. Neither Draco nor Harry know EVERYTHING about each other, I don't dispute that, BUT whatever part of Draco's personality ( 1/4, 1/8 or 1/2 - arbitrary numbers) Harry sees, he IMO judges absolutely spot on - as "Draco is a pureblooded bigot" and therefore of the wrong sort. It is true, that "pureblooded bigot" may not be all what Draco is about, BUT why would Harry be interested at ALL to learn more about Draco when he sees Draco's hateful behavior towards Hermione, if nothing else? Draco may be a loving son, an animal lover and overall a fluffy bunny underneath all that hatefulness, but why should Harry CARE about all that if all he sees is hatefulness? I mentioned in the past that my RL analogy of "pureblood bigotry" is anti-Semitism. I realize that there are many different interpretations and RL analogies for this. Some people will associate it with racism, some people argue that the best analogy is not racial at all, but social elitism, it is different interpretation for everybody. Personally, I don't see better analogy than anti- Semitism. When Draco spats 'Mudblood" at Hermione and I am sure I mentioned it on the list in the past, I can so easily substitute it with famous derogatory name for many soviet Jews. SO, if I am about to get acquainted with the person for one reason or another and I will learn that this person thinks of Jews as "second sort people", I know that I will NOT have any desire to learn ANYTHING else about this person. Why? Because in my mind no matter how wonderful such person is in general, this person will be first and foremost " the person of anti-Semitic vies" and if I am given any choice in the matter, I would certainly not want to have anything in common with this person. So, as long as Draco remains who he is I totally see why Harry will not be willing to look deeper into who Draco is all together. When Harry sees that Draco may begin to change his views and who knows maybe despite my pessimism he already started doing it after HBP, then I can see that Harry will reevaluate. Harry's judgment of Draco may not be complete, that I have no problem with, but I think he judges what he sees well. Right, now to Draco's view of Harry and that will bring us to your point, Carol. You ARE correct not too many people know how dangerous Harry's life is and may envy him before HBP. although everybody knows that his parents died, so I still don't see that too many people would envy that, BUT I totally see your point well.... to the point. WE the readers know how dangerous Harry's life is and it is NOT just Harry's POV, it is a fact, isn't it? Almost every year somebody tries to kill him and in HBP well everybody knows that. We know that Harry almost always tries to escape death. SO, the fact that Draco does not know what Harry's life is really about, IMO does not make him right or justified in envying Harry at all. I doubt that if Draco knew that Harry could be killed at any given moment ( we know that final confrontation will occur at the end of book 7, Harry does not, so he can expect it at any time, IMO), he would envy Harry much. JMO, Alla hoping that she was clear enough. From sherriola at earthlink.net Sat Jan 7 03:19:14 2006 From: sherriola at earthlink.net (Sherry Gomes) Date: Fri, 6 Jan 2006 19:19:14 -0800 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Lessons in the book WAS:Points awarded to Trio in PS/SS In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <007901c61339$23891d90$0400a8c0@pensive> No: HPFGUIDX 146038 > Chris: > > It's certainly not OK to buck the justice system, even > if it is flawed, just to save 1 or 2 lives. Harry > should have been fighting the ministry to present the > truth of Sirius. Truth serum, non-cheating quills, > and the pensives are all ways Harry could have told > the truth. Instead he aided an escaped convict, > keeping him hidden when he could have been freed. Sherry now: But history is full of examples of a few people who did something, something that broke the law or centuries old traditions and changed the world, or their world for the better. Right off the top of my head, two American examples, the American revolution and Rosa Parks and the whole civil rights movement. in the 60's, during the civil rights movements, people were defying unfair and discriminatory laws, even at the risk of their lives. And they were right to do so. If the justice system supports an evil or corrupt society, it must be bucked. Take the anti-apartheid, (spelling) movement in South Africa. Discrimination was the law of the land, but people with honor and bravery stood up against it and fought it. Or the people who hid Jews from the Gestapo during world war II. history is full of people who broke laws to help others or to change an evil or corrupt society. Sirius was innocent, yet we can be sure Fudge wasn't going to listen. not with the press hounding him and complaining about ministry incompetence. Sirius would have had his soul sucked out so fast, and we have that from canon. so, the trio and Dumbledore should have just let it happen, because the law is the law? on a more personal level for a moment. I am totally blind. in the US, there is a law called the Americans with Disabilities act, which is supposed to try to ensure equal treatment for people with disabilities. Among other things, this means i can take my guide dog into public places, and employers must accommodate me for essential job functions, so that I can compete equally with sighted people. on my current job, that could involve scheduling considerations because of public transportation, special equipment, such as a screen reading program for my computer. it also means that when i finish training--I just started this job a month ago--my phone system will be automatically set to turn off after every call, so I can finish the work I have to do on customer accounts. Sighted employees don't have this option. Yes, it is special treatment. But on the other hand, the way my computer works, and they way sighted people use a computer are very different, and especially in my company's internal systems, which are seriously mouse driven. my technology is keyboard driven, and it takes a lot of creativity and jumping through hoops to get it to work with the internal systems. So, the company takes that into consideration, and gives me a little special treatment, because of my technology. That doesn't mean they expect less of me, in terms of skill or performance, but just that they acknowledge, that i have to do the job differently. yet, there are people who resent that and complain about special treatment. should the employer fire all disabled people, so the rest of the company won't feel bad? my point being, that Harry has a serious responsibility, saving the world he loves. He didn't ask for it. He would probably love to be an everyday ordinary wizard, with two parents, a sibling or two, a normal life, no evil dark lord out to kill him every time he turns around. For the most part, much of his special treatment has kept him alive, or his rule breaking rules has saved the lives of others, such as Ginny in COS, and the WW in general. Now, at the ripe old age of 17, he gets to look forward to destroying soul pieces and somehow defeating the most evil wizard of all time. Somehow, i can't find it in myself to quibble over a little special treatment or rule breaking. Sherry From sstraub at mail.utexas.edu Sat Jan 7 04:23:08 2006 From: sstraub at mail.utexas.edu (orzchis) Date: Sat, 07 Jan 2006 04:23:08 -0000 Subject: Complete secret. . .the whole school knows In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146039 Steve wrote: > > Harry saved (or at least, helped save) one of the most precious > artifacts in the wizard world. There is only one known Philosopher's > Stone in existence, and Harry saved it from being captured by the most > dangerous and notorious criminal who ever lived. That is worth far > more in value than the detriment of being out past curfew. > But does the average student know anything about it? Dumbledore tells Harry in the hospital wing that what happened in the dungeon between him (Harry) and Professor Quirrell is a complete secret, and so naturally the whole school knows. I'm sure one of the reasons he expresses himself like this is to keep Harry from getting a swelled head or bragging. But it turns out that "the whole school" knows only rumors -- when Harry tells Ron & Hermione what happened, they are amazed (and Hermione screams). So. . .what _does_ "the whole school" assume has happened? Quirrell _is_ dead after all. Does the average random student know this? What might he/she think of it if he/she did know it? Here's one place (among many) where we (the readers) are handicapped by Harry's 11- year-old POV; by Harry's limited POV in any case. (Harry wouldn't necessarily question what Dumbledore has told him; why should he fill in everybody on what happened if "the whole school knows"?) In OOTP when Harry (referring to the abovementioned event) blurts out in Umbridge's class that Quirrell had LV on the back of his head, the general reaction seems to be embarrassment -- too bad Potter's delusional. This reaction on this particular occasion could be aided & abetted by Umbridge, who proclaims Harry a liar, being the authority figure on hand; and by the events having been four years' previous, with vacations & stuff in between to put everything on the back burner of people's memories. (I think this effect kicks in every year. At the end of spring term Harry usually confronts LV; then everybody goes home to have a summer, & the excitement of sensational events potentially cools off, I'm guessing, for an average student who doesn't know Harry well, even if they did get a whiff of events when they happened.) Thoughts? Sandy Straubhaar From drednort at alphalink.com.au Sat Jan 7 04:35:34 2006 From: drednort at alphalink.com.au (Shaun Hately) Date: Sat, 07 Jan 2006 15:35:34 +1100 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Lessons in the book WAS:Points awarded to Trio in PS/SS In-Reply-To: <007901c61339$23891d90$0400a8c0@pensive> References: Message-ID: <43BFDFC6.7558.5012BEB@localhost> No: HPFGUIDX 146040 On 6 Jan 2006 at 19:19, Sherry Gomes wrote: > my point being, that Harry has a serious responsibility, saving the > world he loves. He didn't ask for it. He would probably love to be > an everyday ordinary wizard, with two parents, a sibling or two, a > normal life, no evil dark lord out to kill him every time he turns > around. For the most part, much of his special treatment has kept him > alive, or his rule breaking rules has saved the lives of others, such > as Ginny in COS, and the WW in general. Now, at the ripe old age of > 17, he gets to look forward to destroying soul pieces and somehow > defeating the most evil wizard of all time. Somehow, i can't find it > in myself to quibble over a little special treatment or rule breaking. But, on the other hand... I'm trying to figure out how to put this. I don't deny that Harry's life is hard and tough and cruel and unfair. Not for a moment. There's so much about Harry's life that is unfair and horrible to have to deal with. *But* in my view, that's not an argument for special treatment when it comes to his school life - not by any means. In fact, it's an argument for the exact opposite in my view. Harry would *love* to be an everyday ordinary wizard. And every piece of special treatment he received at school would make him less ordinary. People should only be treating Harry differently from any other schoolboy at Hogwarts in cases where it is absolutely unavoidable. Now the fact is, I don't think Harry really does get special treatment - not often, anyway. I think Hogwarts does, for the most part, treat Harry as if he was just another student. And I think that is good. I'm just pointing out though that special treatment because of what Harry is, what he has to do... to me that would be an awful thing to do to him. The boy deserves as much chance to be normal as anyone else. And for the most part, I think he gets that. Yours Without Wax, Dreadnought Shaun Hately | www.alphalink.com.au/~drednort/thelab.html (ISTJ) | drednort at alphalink.com.au | ICQ: 6898200 "You know the very powerful and the very stupid have one thing in common. They don't alter their views to fit the facts. They alter the facts to fit the views. Which can be uncomfortable if you happen to be one of the facts that need altering." The Doctor - Doctor Who: The Face of Evil Where am I: Frankston, Victoria, Australia From kchuplis at alltel.net Sat Jan 7 02:45:08 2006 From: kchuplis at alltel.net (kchuplis) Date: Sat, 07 Jan 2006 02:45:08 -0000 Subject: Lupin Tonks/Draco/LV's wand In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146041 Kchuplis: Just some thoughts that occurred today and oddly enough, includes some of what you bring up here: Lindseyharrisst wrote: > a. not foreshadowed or calculable, even in retrospect, contrary to > most things in the books, esp. shipping Kchuplis: Mostly because we see what Harry sees (with the exception of the opening chapters of HBP). Harry isn't around Lupin and Tonks much so he doesn't see the development, neither do we, but we do see Tonks and her meltdown (doubly incomprehensible without knowing the cause). > b. because it is a narrative afterthought it was not well thought out, > what good could Lupin and Tonks see in each other (over being with > someone else, or alone)? Kchuplis:Not sure this matters. What do any couple that fall in love see in each other. For me, personally, I find Lupin one of the most intriguing and likeable characters of the series. He's gentle (when not afflicted) - and personally, I think that is Lupin's great feat. Despite his "furry problem" he has remained a "good man" (obviously, I do NOT subscribe to the ESE!Lupin theory). He's a great teacher. He has many qualities to recommend to him. Tonks is young, attractive, perky, why should he not like her? > c. does it seem in chracter for Lupin to fall in love (and with Tonks)? Kchuplis: Sure. Why not? Once again, love isn't an equation. It's something undefineable that happens. If we could quantify the why's and wherefores of falling in love, well, someone would get rich. > d. Do you think it's authentic love on his or her part? Kchuplis: Sure. It's been pushed pretty hard that wizard's who are depressed, but particularly depressed over an unrequitted love are prone to losing their power. Hence Tonks mousy lank hair and inability to really be affective. Her change of patronus form. Love is a powerful thing. I'd think by Book 6 we should all get that by now. > I confess to having a belief he should be with another, but that > aside, I just don't see the point. Kchuplis here on down: But I was thinking tonight...I was reading the big conversation between Harry and Dumbledore regarding the horcruxes after Harry obtained Slugo's memory and Harry, in a way, says the same thing "what is the point" of being able to love? Yet, DD stresses it again and again. I begin to wonder if there *isn't* a very important point to the shipping in these books. Personally, I do not see these relationships as "shipping". They are relationships (shipping to me indicates fan wishes for certain parties to get together, not actual relationships that are intended by the author - perhaps I'm wrong but that is how I've always seen the term). We now know by book six that 1) Fleur REALLY loves Bill. She doesn't care if he is eating meat off the floor, he's hers and that is that. We can assume that Bill is just as attached. (any man that sends his fiance to his mom's house ALONE has made up his mind and is just saying "get used to her".) Love is unconditional. 2) Tonks is SO upset over Lupin feeling he is too old (and ocassionally too furry) for her, she begins to lose her ability to metamorph and her patronus assumes a new shape. That isn't "crush" material. So we know that here is another case of someone loving unconditionally. 3) We see by the end of 6 Ron and Hermione finally stop beating about the bush. There is no time now for coy teenage shennanigans. And if Hermione is still willing to put up with Ron after the last couple of years, she must really love him. 4) Harry and Ginny - well, we've gone on about THAT enough already. Still, it isn't just pure love, but unconditional love that sacrifices that is so powerful in DD's eyes and so negligeable in LV's. Snape while in DE mode even hints at it when he tells Tonks her new patronus is "weak". By the end of HBP we realize that he means "ohhhh...you changed your patronus to resemble HIM. She's in luuuuuurve with a werewolf ... How noble...how weak". His comment makes no sense any other way. "People who wear their hearts on their sleeves..." Could it be that all this "shipping" IS important for book 7? As LV's leadership cultivates arguments and distrust, DD's cultivates love. Which environment encourages growth and, as a by product, strength? After all, we expend a LOT more effort on behalf of those we love and just try to forget those we hate. I can't form a more exact thesis than this right now, but somehow, I don't think that all this was just for romantic interest on a novelists part. Now, Draco. These are just some thoughts I had last night after reading the Moaning Myrtle scene in HBP: The only "outside" image (out of HP's POV)of Draco we ever see is what we see from Moaning Myrtle. Obviously her view is tinted in another way BUT one thing you can bank on is that Malfoy isn't "posturing" for Myrtle, nor trying to manipulate her (why would he?) so she is giving us about the most unbiased view of Draco we've ever had. It's so out of step with what we know of him, Harry and Ron would never in a million years guess who she meant if HP didn't actually see him in that room later. He's crying, he feels bullied. It begged me to aske the question "How much pressure is Draco under?" Not just now, from Lv but really his whole life. How hard is it to live up to Lucius Malfoy? DE extraordinaire. He is always more "in the know' about things so obviously Lucius talks freely around Draco. But he may not talk TO Draco much so D has to guess at what it takes to live up to expectations. I can well believe Draco feels bullied. We assume by Harry but maybe he feels it from his father and, by now, probably some of teh DE. But also I can see him feeling that way about Harry as well. For all of his nasty intentions (no matter the seat of motivation, he is pretty nasty) he rarely comes off winner. Off hand, I can't really think of one "trick" he played on Harry that didn't have at least mild consequences, eventually, for him. Most public and disastrously was the dementor trick. That was a spectacular public failure. So from Draco's POV it really could lead him to feel bullied there as well. We are definitely feeling some pity for him by the end of HBP. Even though Snape prevents him from making a soul killing move, does Draco still have an option? Could he somehow be instrumental in the downfall of LV? Could a blunder triggered by something Harry does backfire in an even more spectacular way for Draco? It wouldn't make him the hero, but rather be more of that what comes around goes around syndrome. I often think that even though we think of "the trio" as Harry, Ron and Hermione, the main triumverate is going to end up being Harry, Neville and Draco as far as important roles in the demise of LV goes. ____________ Last thought: Where was LV's wand all that time he was hiding in snakes and squirrels in the forest? kchuplis From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Sat Jan 7 04:48:11 2006 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Sat, 07 Jan 2006 04:48:11 -0000 Subject: Special treatment of Harry or not WAS:Re: Lessons in the book In-Reply-To: <43BFDFC6.7558.5012BEB@localhost> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146042 Shaun: Harry would *love* to be an everyday ordinary wizard. And every piece > of special treatment he received at school would make him less > ordinary. People should only be treating Harry differently from any > other schoolboy at Hogwarts in cases where it is absolutely > unavoidable. > > Now the fact is, I don't think Harry really does get special > treatment - not often, anyway. I think Hogwarts does, for the most > part, treat Harry as if he was just another student. And I think that > is good. I'm just pointing out though that special treatment because > of what Harry is, what he has to do... to me that would be an awful > thing to do to him. > > The boy deserves as much chance to be normal as anyone else. And for > the most part, I think he gets that. Alla: I sort of agree with you, but not quite. I cannot speak for Sherry, but I think what she meant was that Harry gets special treatment because he needs it to survive - not because of who he is, although partially I guess it is so very connected together - Harry is the Boy who lived and he needs help to survive death, IMO. Don't you think that the need to stay alive IS on the list of the cases where special treatment is unavoidable? Like for example Irene brought up earlier Dumbledore's special lessons in HBP as an example of special treatment. To me it is just SUCH a clear cut of fight for survival- to get to know Voldemort's strengths and weaknesses because Harry needs it for the final battle and for Horcruxes hunt, but I agree with you in a sense that the examples of "special treatment" NOT connected to the need of stay alive really do not look as special treatment to me in a sense that Hogwarts would not have done it to any other student. In the beginning of this discussion I thought that the only example of special treatment that is not connected to his fight against Voldemort was giving Harry a broomstick and letting him to be on the team in his first year. I still think this way, except that Geoff pointed out that it is not even clear that first years are not allowed on the team, only that Harry is the first one who was selected for many years, so maybe the special treatment was only allowing Harry to have a broomstick. IMO does not look lie a long list of special treatment at ALL, if one does not consider the help - direct or circumstantial Harry gets in order to survive the final battle. JMO, Alla From belviso at attglobal.net Sat Jan 7 04:06:31 2006 From: belviso at attglobal.net (Magpie) Date: Fri, 6 Jan 2006 23:06:31 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Lessons in the book WAS:Points awarded to Trio in PS/SS References: <007901c61339$23891d90$0400a8c0@pensive> Message-ID: <01bf01c6133f$be943850$be8c400c@Spot> No: HPFGUIDX 146043 I can't stop myself from jumping in there again.:-) > Sherry now: So, the company takes that into consideration, and gives > me a little special treatment, because of my technology. That doesn't > mean > they expect less of me, in terms of skill or performance, but just that > they > acknowledge, that i have to do the job differently. yet, there are people > who resent that and complain about special treatment. should the employer > fire all disabled people, so the rest of the company won't feel bad? Magpie: That's a great example--I had previously been thinking of a similar one which was children who are sick. I believe it's commonly accepted that one issue that should be dealt with when you have a very sick child is jealousy in siblings. As ridiculous as it seems to be jealous of a sibling who might be dying, it can happen. It's not really the sibling wants to die, it's that they probably have other anxieties that come out that way. It's human nature--not just to see only what we don't have, because that maybe makes it too petty. Sometimes it's petty--some people in your office are probably just complainers who see "the blind technology makes it easier" is an excuse for doing less work. But I think beyond that it's human nature to see in other people the things for which we are searching or we lack and want. So it's certainly true to point out that "being Harry" would mean losing your parents etc., but I don't think that really would make an impression on a kid who was jealous of him. It just says those feelings are not respected. Similarly, I think the idea that Harry would love to be normal with parents and a sibling or two is based on *Harry* seeing in others what he wants and not really seeing the drawbacks. Ron has all those things and sometimes they're difficult (Harry's experience with the Weasleys is different than Ron's). It's not as dramatic as having someone tying you to a tombstone and forcing you to duel, but families can have a big effect over time. When it's your life you care even if your problems aren't as bad as someone else's. It seems to me that the three characters in canon who tend to be the most focused on Harry getting special treatment are all characters who have some issue about *themselves* not being special that makes them sensitive to this. It's not really about Harry, because even if Harry was carried to meals on a gold litter it wouldn't bother them if they were happy with themselves--and Harry is high-profile person. Explaining why Harry needs the treatment he gets or didn't ask for it etc. doesn't address the problem because it isn't really about Harry at all, it's about the person in question. With all three of the people I'm thinking of they definitely have issues related to this--things that are often being shown in the text at the same time only we don't think of them that way because Harry doesn't see it that way. -m From tonks_op at yahoo.com Sat Jan 7 05:38:36 2006 From: tonks_op at yahoo.com (Tonks) Date: Sat, 07 Jan 2006 05:38:36 -0000 Subject: Snape again/Love and Vengeance/Ending In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146044 I have not been able to read or post over the past few months. But I have been thinking about a few things and I think it might fit in this thread. Saw the Narnia movie and saw some of HP there. I think that JKR was influenced by Lewis. In any event here are my most current musings: I think that book 7 with have Harry making a sacrifice for, of all people, Snape. I am not sure how it will get to that point, but if DD made a sacrifice for Draco, it would make sense that Harry would for Snape. If Harry is Everyman, and DD is the alchemist (ah, I hate to say it maybe Han's is right. It IS all about Alchemy,), then in order for Harry to reach to the level of DD and become a fully realized human being, he will have to die for his enemy. He will have to place Love above all else. I also think that Sirius will be of some use, given that he is a "star" as in the star that leads the magi (AKA wizards) to the Christ. Again, not sure how this will play out, just feel that it will somehow. Tonks_op From tonks_op at yahoo.com Sat Jan 7 06:44:58 2006 From: tonks_op at yahoo.com (Tonks) Date: Sat, 07 Jan 2006 06:44:58 -0000 Subject: Special treatment - yes or no/Rules In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146045 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "sistermagpie" wrote: > I have come to the conclusion now that perhaps the reason for this > is that JKR sees it as important for people to always make choices > based on what they want to do, right or wrong, and never based on > something outside of themselves. The DEs are all sort of childish > in their dependence on Voldemort to tell them right and wrong. So I think Rowling just may see it as important as everyone to feel above the rules at times--by which I don't mean they should demand special treatment, but that her people always make choices based on what they want and not what someone else thinks is right. Tonks here: I am a bit confused by what you say. Surely you don't mean that people should just do as they will, come what may. I do not think that is what JKR is saying at all. I just got a book for Christmas "The Wisdom of Harry Potter" and it goes into the moral choices concepts. He uses Kohlberg's theories of moral development. I recommend this book to anyone interested in exploring the moral principles in the books. My own views are that JKR wants the reader and Harry to find the higher law, the ancient law if you will. The law that is higher than earthy governments or social norms. Deep within each of us, if we listen, we do know what is "right". It seems to me to be implanted in all humans somehow. How else can you explain that everyone, in all places, in all times see, for example, that murder is wrong. There may be some differences in what counts as murder, etc., but the basis idea is there. And it is there in all cultures, all people, over the course of human history. Where did this come from? I think that there are stages of moral development and that the highest level would be shown in that person who could go against the norm of their group, or their government to follow what they "know" in their heart to be "right". As DD says what is right is not always what is easy. There are rules that need to be observed as a matter of human custom, such as DD being polite to his enemies on the tower. There are rules that make sense and should be observed for reasons of social control of base impulsive. The person who follows the higher course does not just break rules willy-nilly. They follow the rules and customs like everyone else, until a rule or custom violated the "higher" law. (They are not following earthly rules or higher rules because it "feels good do it", or it is what they "want" to do. They follow them because it is the "right" thing to do regardless of their desires. They are, as DD, noble.) JKR, IMO, wants us to learn along with Harry, to have the courage along with Harry to follow the "higher road", and do what is right over what is easy. This does not mean to be a rebel for the sake of being a rebel, or being a hard a-- for the sake of showing that no one can boss you around. It is not that at all. The most gentle, kind and loving person can, like DD, stand against the croud and follow a higher law. Also, odd as it seems, can someone like Snape. And Harry's minor rule breaking is just that, minor. School boy stuff. As he matures he will follow the basis rules for the same reason that DD would, but Harry will also follow the higher road when necessary. Tonks_op From bboyminn at yahoo.com Sat Jan 7 08:24:06 2006 From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Sat, 07 Jan 2006 08:24:06 -0000 Subject: Special treatment - yes or no In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146046 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "sistermagpie" wrote: > > > bboyminn: > > > > Even though you have somewhat established it in other posts, > > I think this is the flaw in your assumption. The game was > > not over; Slytherin has NOT won. The game isn't over until > > the final buzzer sounds, and the final buzzer hadn't sounded > > yet. School was still in session, points could still be awared > > for good behavior and taken for bad behavior. > > Magpie: > > Yes, the game wasn't *truly* won because Dumbledore gave out more > points. I agree. But the house is decorated in Slytherin colors to > make it LOOK like it was over and they won so that they'd have more > egg on their face. The *assumption* is the whole point of the bait > and switch. ...edited... > bboyminn: I confess I didn't pay enough attention to that aspect of your post. In a small sense, I was replying to the thread in general rather than to you in specific detail. In response to your specific allegation, that Dumbledore intentionally planned this method of awarding points to rub in the humiliation of Slytherin, I think you are taking too narrow a view (and I also admit to overstating your position somewhat). If we assume that Dumbledore has nothing to do or to worry about besides awarding House points then you might be right. But, he has a school to run. Dark and dangerous goings on have just occurred. People are/were in the hospital. Harry nearly died. Voldemort was in the castle. Quirrel IS dead. The Stone was nearly lost. End of year Exams are upon them. There are reports to be filled out. Questions to be answered. Arrangements to be made. I'm sure the Board of Governors and the Ministry were a little curious about how a teacher managed to die on school grounds, especially when it happened in a chamber that was very heavily protected. Certainly in the view of the very busy and harassed Dumbledore worrying about House colors at the Leaving Feast can wait. Yes, I'm sure Dumbledore enjoyed building suspense, and allowing Neville's points to be granted last, so it appeared as if Neville's point secured the victory. But I see the House Colors flying as more a matter of practicality and convenience than malicious intent or ill-will. Dumbledore is a busy man, and the House Cup, while it is important to the students, hardly holds the fate of the world in the balance, and certainly pales compared to everything else that had happened recently in the castle. So, I really think for Dumbledore, it was just a matter of administrative convenience. Further, at that point in time, the additional points had not been awarded, and barring those last minute points, Slytherin was in the lead, and was the logical and likely winner, so their colors flew. Simple as that. But when the year actually ended and the final tally was in, Gryffindor had actually won, so the House Colors were changed. That's just the way it was. I don't see any conspircy or malicious intent; just simple priorities and administrative conveniences. > Steve: > > Was Slytherin VERY disappointed? They certainly were, and > > justifiably so. But did you, or they, really expect to live > > their lives without disappointment? > > Magpie: > > Err...this is coming way out of left field for me. Of course > they should expect to live their lives with disappointment-- > and will throughout the series. ... > ... I have not only never suggested that Slytherin should get > the cup back, I have said more than once that I consider > Gryffindor the winner. I already agree that everyone needs to > learn to live with disappointment and would hardly > argue otherwise. bboyminn: Again, my foot is firmly in my mouth from making general statements that very much appear to be specific statements. I wasn't accusing you, it just seem like a nice way to phrase it at the time. So, forget about the 'you' and 'they', we all agree that disapointment is part of life. We should also note that Slytherin seem to have gotten over it nicely. Indeed we are making a bigger issue of it than they are. On an unrelated note; from off-line correspondence, I have become aware that the statement in my previous post of 'THAT'S LIFE, get over it' could be taken in more ways than intended. That comment was directed at Slytherins and at my 'game' analogy. Sometime victory really is snatched from the jaws of defeat. Sometimes, in the last minute, there is a turn over or a rally in the game, and sure victory become a sudden lose. There is dissapointment and let down, and then life moves on. (notice the lack of 'you' and 'they' in that statement; not taking any chances this time) Most important of all, that 'get over it' comment WAS NOT directed at this group or its members. I want to make that clear. This has been an enjoyable discussion. Again, just trying to establish some perspective; though, apparently, not doing a very good job of it. Steve/bboyminn From ceridwennight at hotmail.com Sat Jan 7 13:07:02 2006 From: ceridwennight at hotmail.com (Ceridwen) Date: Sat, 07 Jan 2006 13:07:02 -0000 Subject: Special treatment of Harry or not WAS:Re: Lessons in the book In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146047 Alla: *(snip)* > In the beginning of this discussion I thought that the only example > of special treatment that is not connected to his fight against > Voldemort was giving Harry a broomstick and letting him to be on the > team in his first year. > > I still think this way, except that Geoff pointed out that it is not > even clear that first years are not allowed on the team, only that > Harry is the first one who was selected for many years, so maybe the > special treatment was only allowing Harry to have a broomstick. IMO > does not look lie a long list of special treatment at ALL, if one > does not consider the help - direct or circumstantial Harry gets in > order to survive the final battle. Ceridwen: My gripe is with the rule-breaking in ordinary incidents. Such as talking in class, and wandering around after hours (with or without cloak), sneaking into Hogsmeade despite warnings for his life in PoA and suchlike. While I do see the point of Saving The World, as in entering the seven challenges in SS/PS, or the Chamber in CoS, I don't think Harry should get a pass for ordinary infractions just because he's The Boy Who Lived. That, and the various mysteries he solves in the books, doesn't mean he can carry on a conversation with Ron in class, for one instance. His studies are important for him to progress to the point where he can defeat Voldemort. And the sneaking into Hogsmeade was forbidden to him for the very point that his life was supposedly in danger. My other gripe is the cavalier attitude toward detention. Instead of being ashamed that they broke the rules (in an ordinary manner), they're offended that they are being disciplined. The hero, his best friends, and the narration, all seem to say that detention is no big deal, it's quite all right to have it, it proves your goodness instead of proving that you were doing less than you could have done to make the most of school. I do happen to think that the kids seem to consider themselves above the rules ordinary students have to follow, in these examples. I can see where Harry might feel that way, after a lifetime of mistreatment by Dudley and his aunt and uncle. Getting around unreasonable rules is how he has survived. And, Ron, with the twins especially, but also the supposedly negative reaction against 'being like Percy', would definitely see it as a badge of honor. But, it's no more than others get for their infractions on the same level. Someone, was it Geoff? mentioned that this is a time-honored tradition in children's school fictions. I know it is in children's TV shows. In fact, that comment made me remember an old TV show I used to watch and love, McKeever and the Colonel, where a nice boy in a military boarding school makes plans, runs afoul of the rules, is constantly being followed around and threatened with expulsion by the mean sergeant, but since whatever he got up to ended up helping someone in the long run, the colonel who ran the academy gave him pass after pass along with kindly lectures about why what he did was wrong. I'm sure (the character) McKeever grew up to become another Sgt Bilko. Ceridwen. From ceridwennight at hotmail.com Sat Jan 7 13:30:15 2006 From: ceridwennight at hotmail.com (Ceridwen) Date: Sat, 07 Jan 2006 13:30:15 -0000 Subject: Lupin Tonks/Draco/LV's wand In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146048 Kchuplis: *(snipping relationships list* > Still, it isn't just pure love, but unconditional love that sacrifices that is so powerful in > DD's eyes and so negligeable in LV's. Snape while in DE mode even hints at it when > he tells Tonks her new patronus is "weak". By the end of HBP we realize that he means > "ohhhh...you changed your patronus to resemble HIM. She's in luuuuuurve with a > werewolf ... How noble...how weak". His comment makes no sense any other way. > "People who wear their hearts on their sleeves..." > > Could it be that all this "shipping" IS important for book 7? As LV's leadership > cultivates arguments and distrust, DD's cultivates love. Which environment > encourages growth and, as a by product, strength? After all, we expend a LOT more > effort on behalf of those we love and just try to forget those we hate. I can't form a > more exact thesis than this right now, but somehow, I don't think that all this was > just for romantic interest on a novelists part. *(snip)* Ceridwen: You mention the difference between Dumbledore's thoughts on love, and LV's, and gave examples of healthy love (no matter what one thinks about the particular pairings themselves). But I think you have a good idea going, and will try to expand. Bellatrix is married. Yet her entire focus is on LV. It's almost as if she's more in love with him than with her husband, who remains a blurry presence at the outskirts of her life for readers. This isn't healthy. I would mistrust anything or anyone who deliberately stepped between husband and wife. LV has come across as the sort of person who expects to be held in higher esteem by his followers than their families. Definitely destructive. Narcissa fleeing to Snape to save Draco. Why does she have to sneak around? Because LV would see it as betrayal that she loves ***her own son*** enough to defy him. LV isn't the center of her universe. He doesn't like that. At all. It shows a lack of control. His, over the Malfoys. And Bellatrix again, saying she would be honored to sacrifice her nonexistent children for LV. !!! Barty Crouch jr killing his own father, and before then, defying him to join LV and fanatically carry out LV's missions. Degrading his mother's sacrifice in order to return to LV. What we see with the DEs we have knowledge of, is dysfunctional fanaticism which translates to an unhealthy love of LV which is higher than their love of family. Not that it's real love, it's more of an extreme devotion. But in the basest, most disgusting sense, it's a sort of love. That's why LV uses Draco to get back at the Malfoys. Because to him, Draco is the *thing* standing in the way of their complete devotion. He destroys healthy love. He expects his people to give it up in order to serve him. He is the antithesis of Dumbledore and Harry, the bane of True Love. Ceridwen. From ceridwennight at hotmail.com Sat Jan 7 13:50:08 2006 From: ceridwennight at hotmail.com (Ceridwen) Date: Sat, 07 Jan 2006 13:50:08 -0000 Subject: Special treatment - yes or no In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146049 bboyminn: *(snip)* > Yes, I'm sure Dumbledore enjoyed building suspense, and allowing > Neville's points to be granted last, so it appeared as if Neville's > point secured the victory. But I see the House Colors flying as more a > matter of practicality and convenience than malicious intent or > ill-will. Dumbledore is a busy man, and the House Cup, while it is > important to the students, hardly holds the fate of the world in the > balance, and certainly pales compared to everything else that had > happened recently in the castle. So, I really think for Dumbledore, it > was just a matter of administrative convenience. > > Further, at that point in time, the additional points had not been > awarded, and barring those last minute points, Slytherin was in the > lead, and was the logical and likely winner, so their colors flew. > Simple as that. But when the year actually ended and the final tally > was in, Gryffindor had actually won, so the House Colors were changed. > That's just the way it was. I don't see any conspircy or malicious > intent; just simple priorities and administrative conveniences. Ceridwen: I've been wondering all through this thread, if maybe Snape sees it as a personal slap by Dumbledore? Even though we do see through Harry's eyes, it's seemed, on occasion, that DD doesn't fully appreciate Snape's role in things, or at least he doesn't let on around Snape. Could some of the later animosity from Snape (and other Slytherins) be based on this sort of personal affront, rightly or wrongly assumed? As you say, DD is a busy man. But it does seem as though he could have mentioned more points to be given, to the Heads of Houses. If Slytherin colors were flying, I am assuming it was Snape who put them there (the kid ditched book one in the frenzy of a yard sale). Despite intentions, it did play out embarrassingly for Slytherin, and its HoH, esp. if he put the decorations there to begin with. Someone surely did! bboyminn: > Again, my foot is firmly in my mouth from making general statements > that very much appear to be specific statements. I wasn't accusing > you, it just seem like a nice way to phrase it at the time. *(snip)* Ceridwen: I'm glad to see someone else does the same thing! I use the general 'you' all the time, and am sometimes questioned on it. I did get your point, though, that Slytherin should just get over it and move on. If that helps! Ceridwen. From mgrantwich at yahoo.com Sat Jan 7 14:05:05 2006 From: mgrantwich at yahoo.com (Magda Grantwich) Date: Sat, 7 Jan 2006 06:05:05 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Special treatment - yes or no In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20060107140505.19735.qmail@web53109.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 146050 > > > > Magpie: > > > > No, I emphasized that they [Slytherin] had officially won the > > contest (which is why the banners are hanging), and that the > > winning was fair because they won. There's no subplot about a > > fixed house contest suddenly being made fair. ...edited... > > bboyminn: > > So, Slytherin came into the Leaving Feast with a strong lead > and the /assumption/ that they had won. This logical and > reasonable /assumption/ was re-enforced by the fact that there > colors were flying. Further, at that point in time, it was > logical for their colors to be flying on the /assumption/ that > their strong lead made them the clear winner. > > However, Dumbledore, as well as all the other professors, were > well within their rights, to my way of thinking, in awarding > and taking points at that time. So, in my view, the game > wasn't over, and we and > they had only assumed who the winner would be. > Well, yes, but.... Who put up the Slytherin banners and colours in the first place? Did Slytherin do it out of a sense of entitlement or because they were cocky? Does every house that is in the lead happen to have the hall decorated in their colours every year and then hold its collective breath hoping that no last-minute points are handed out that might jeopardize its victory? I don't think so. Slytherin was poked in the collective nose - collateral damage in Dumbledore's efforts to reward the Trio and Neville for their actions. I don't think Dumbledore did it maliciously - or even pointedly (or if he did, the message was aimed at Snape, not the Slyths). The issue - as Magpie has eloquently stated in her posts - is not that the Trio and Neville didn't DESERVE the points. They certainly did. The issue is the last-minute-ness of the whole thing, the stripping of the hall of Slytherin colours. The Slyths are a proud house; it was unnecessarily humiliating. But I think Dumbledore also worked to take as much of the sting out of it as he could: 1. The Trio's 150 points simply brought Gryffindor up to a tying position with Slytherin; it's was Neville's points that sent them over the top. 2. The reason for Neville's points was the courage he showed in standing up to his friends. Something that has a lot more power after we read OOTP than before. And I'm sure Snape got the point - Dumbledore is saying that this klutzy cauldron-melting first-year Neville kid has more guts than fifth-year prefect-badge-wearing Remus Lupin did. And of course, if it turns out that in turning against Voldemort and becoming a spy for Dumbledore that Snape betrayed his own friends like Barty Jr. or the Lestranges or Lucius Malfoy, then it might also be Dumbledore's way of giving Snape some subtle props too. I clipped the rest of Steve's post because I thought it sounded very unSteveishly harsh. I think we all understand that disappointment happens in life. But it's also understandable that people want to know why they were disappointed. Magda __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com From zarleycat at sbcglobal.net Sat Jan 7 15:03:15 2006 From: zarleycat at sbcglobal.net (kiricat4001) Date: Sat, 07 Jan 2006 15:03:15 -0000 Subject: Let's talk about Lupin In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146051 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "lindseyharrisst" wrote: > > I did ask this when the book had only just come out an ddidn't get > much response (I imagine because the death issue and snape's loyalty > were the most striking points) - What does the group think of the > Lupin shipping in HBP? I contend that it is... > a. not foreshadowed or calculable, even in retrospect, contrary to > most things in the books, esp. shipping > b. because it is a narrative afterthought it was not well thought out, > what good could Lupin and Tonks see in each other (over being with > someone else, or alone)? > c. does it seem in chracter for Lupin to fall in love (and with Tonks)? > d. Do you think it's authentic love on his or her part? > I confess to having a belief he should be with another, but that > aside, I just don't see the point. Marianne: Well, yes, I don't see why Lupin couldn't fall in love, and I don't necessarily think that Lupin and Tonks couldn't be a perfectly happpy couple. But, this pairing didn't work at all for me as written. So, for the purposes of this discussion I guess you and I are on the same page. Lupin struck me as "off" in HBP, compared to the way he felt to me from previous books. That whole speech at the Burrow at Christmas about how he neither likes nor dislikes Snape, his outing as a werewolf would have happened anyway - why blame Snape, he (Lupin) must be grateful for any crumbs that fall his way, etc. It was as if he was chanting these things in his head to convince himself they were true. His whole manner of speech struck me as overly formal, almost stilted. But, to get to the Tonks thing, I agree, I felt it came out of left field. It felt tacked on to me, as if JKR suddenly decided not only to pair these two off, but to use this as another facet of the theme of obsessive love, but an obsessive love that turns out okay. Tonks appears perfectly fine when Harry arrives at the station at the end of OoP, and then, a fortnight later when he sees her upon arriving at the Burrow, she's in her full-blown funk, including the loss of her Metamorphagus powers. She remains colorless, distracted, almost listless every time we see her after that. The denoument of Tonks' problem as it was revealed in the Hospital scene was as jarring to me as someone suddenly dropping an armload of pots and pans on the floor. I thought her timing was horrendous. Here she is, browbeating the man she is supposedly in love with, who is currently reeling from the death of the person who gave him more opportunities to succeed in life, despite being a werewolf, than anyone else. She tries to force him to address their relationship, or lack of it, at this very emotional moment, in front of a bunch of other people. Now, maybe we're supposed to read this as Tonks desperately making a final, heartfelt plea to Remus to make his see she truly loves him. My reaction to her was "What part of "no" don't you understand?" Whether this is indeed true love on the part of Tonks has also not been proved to me. This gets back to the concept of obsessive love. We had examples of others suffering an unhealthy sort of love or infatuation, and acting on it (Merope). We had the description of the amortentia potion. We had the twins selling some sort of love potion. We had Romilda, the fan-girl, trying to slip something to Harry, and inadvertently affecting Ron. Is Tonks' affection for Remus real, or another example of infatuation? Or is it an example of love that may appear obsessive to some readers, but really isn't? The jury is still out for me. Finally, Remus never struck me as being in love with Tonks. Yes, he's reticent and closed-off, and had he dropped to one knee in the Hospital wing and asked Tonks to marry him, I'd have gone blind from terminal eye-rolling. However, we also know that Remus has the weakness of wanting people to like him. Once everyone sort of ganged up on him in the Hospital, I got the feeling that it was easier for him to just surrender than to insist in front of all his colleagues that he really wasn't in love with Tonks. So, the authenticity of his affection for her is also an open question, IMO. The fact that they appeared to be holding hands at DD's funeral did not send signals of a happy couple in love to me, either. However, as Tonks had apparently regained her Metamorphagus ability, I think we're supposed to believe that she and Remus are now officially a couple. Permit me to roll my eyes a bit... Marianne From willsonkmom at msn.com Sat Jan 7 15:43:34 2006 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Sat, 07 Jan 2006 15:43:34 -0000 Subject: Special treatment - yes or no In-Reply-To: <20060107140505.19735.qmail@web53109.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146052 Magda wrote: > > Slytherin was poked in the collective nose - collateral damage in > Dumbledore's efforts to reward the Trio and Neville for their > actions. I don't think Dumbledore did it maliciously - or even > pointedly (or if he did, the message was aimed at Snape, not the > Slyths). The issue - as Magpie has eloquently stated in her posts - > is not that the Trio and Neville didn't DESERVE the points. They > certainly did. The issue is the last-minute-ness of the whole thing, > the stripping of the hall of Slytherin colours. The Slyths are a > proud house; it was unnecessarily humiliating. > > But I think Dumbledore also worked to take as much of the sting out > of it as he could: Potioncat: Canon says the hall was decorated for the Slytherin victory, although I'm not quoting, I just read it. We are told that from Harry's view point. If JKR is saying that the hall was decorated according to the House colors of the new victor, then this is a very mean spirited event. If on the other hand, Harry is coming in late (as he is) and incorrectly assumes that the colors reflect the new winner of the House Cup, we have a different event. We have the hall decorated in the colors of last year's winner, Slytherin. Slytherin also happens to be the leader at the moment. At this meal at least it would make sense for the colors of last year's House Cup Winner to be flying until the new winner was announced. It's a big deal here that last year was Slytherin, but the same thing would happen if last year's winner was Hufflepuff or Ravenclaw. And I assume that DD would have awarded the points even if Gryffindor had been in the lead. (Not as exciting, perhaps.) The fact that Snape was smiling or at least faking a smile makes me think we've made a bigger deal of this than anyone else has. Reminds me of a RL event involving a group of mothers and their young children...but that's another story. From belviso at attglobal.net Sat Jan 7 16:07:19 2006 From: belviso at attglobal.net (Magpie) Date: Sat, 7 Jan 2006 11:07:19 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Special treatment - yes or no/Rules References: Message-ID: <00af01c613a4$70772aa0$8860400c@Spot> No: HPFGUIDX 146053 > Tonks here: > I am a bit confused by what you say. Surely you don't mean that > people should just do as they will, come what may. Magpie: No, that's not what I meant--I explained it better in this post here: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/146030 I meant more the difference between doing something based on your own decision rather than in order to please your chosen authority figure or whatever, but I think I explain more in terms of the story in that post, and how I think JKR is showing that it's important to make your own decisions about right and wrong but also showing that doesn't always lead to the right decisions. Most of the really good characters in the book do seem associated with rule-breaking, often of the most trivial kind--pranking, sneaking out, etc. MWPP put people in danger once a month but just laugh about it now. The only "higher law" they were interested in was what they wanted to do. Tonks: How else can you explain that everyone, in all places, in all times see, for example, that murder is wrong. Magpie: That we are able to feel empathy for others, and that certain values make for more successful societies, so those are the ones that survive.:-) Steve: In response to your specific allegation, that Dumbledore intentionally planned this method of awarding points to rub in the humiliation of Slytherin, I think you are taking too narrow a view (and I also admit to overstating your position somewhat). Magpie: No, I don't think Dumbledore intentionally planned his method of awarding points to rub in the humiliation of Slytherin. I think he intentionally planned the awarding of points to make it a happy surprise for Harry or make more of a big deal about the awarding of these points and didn't think about Slytherin much at all. I think his delivery reflects that. That's why I keep arguing against the idea that Dumbledore was sending a message to Slytherin by doing it. I do agree that Slytherin's losing of the contest itself is no big deal--I don't think Dumbledore had to apologetic about it or anything. So I think I am completely agreeing with your view of what happened. Mostly I see it as JKR knowing how to set up the scene for maximum satisfaction on Harry's part, and I'm not surprised she did that. -m From stevejjen at earthlink.net Sat Jan 7 16:16:22 2006 From: stevejjen at earthlink.net (Jen Reese) Date: Sat, 07 Jan 2006 16:16:22 -0000 Subject: Let's talk about Lupin In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146054 Marianne: > Lupin struck me as "off" in HBP, compared to the way he felt to me > from previous books. That whole speech at the Burrow at Christmas > about how he neither likes nor dislikes Snape, his outing as a > werewolf would have happened anyway - why blame Snape, he (Lupin) > must be grateful for any crumbs that fall his way, etc. It was as > if he was chanting these things in his head to convince himself > they were true. His whole manner of speech struck me as overly > formal, almost stilted. Jen: Lupin seemed off to me too, or rather, his negative traits of passivity and not wanting to take a stand seemed exaggerated. His situation reminded me a little too much of Sirius at Grimmauld. Lupin's mission forced him to temporarily leave behind a life which was somewhat happier and certainly offered more freedom. Being trapped in the werewolf subculture with mostly hostile companions was having a life-draining effect on him just as Grimmauld did for Sirius. It made me nervous that JKR was writing him into a corner just as she did with Sirius, where the only real option was death. But then after the tower sequence and the Lupin/Tonks reveal, it seemed more likely Snape was probabaly the one being set up for the death sequence, the one being stripped of options other than death. Marianne: > But, to get to the Tonks thing, I agree, I felt it came out of > left field. It felt tacked on to me, as if JKR suddenly decided > not only to pair these two off, but to use this as another facet > of the theme of obsessive love, but an obsessive love that turns > out okay. Jen: I couldn't decide, either, until the hand-holding and bubblegum pink hair at the funeral. Is it possible one Marauder will get to live happily ever after?!? I figured that scene was a 'case-closed' moment and unless one dies, they will be a couple. Marianne: > The denoument of Tonks' problem as it was revealed in the Hospital > scene was as jarring to me as someone suddenly dropping an armload > of pots and pans on the floor. I thought her timing was > horrendous. Here she is, browbeating the man she is supposedly in > love with, who is currently reeling from the death of the person > who gave him more opportunities to succeed in life, despite being > a werewolf, than anyone else. She tries to force him to address > their relationship, or lack of it, at this very emotional moment, > in front of a bunch of other people. Now, maybe we're supposed to > read this as Tonks desperately making a final, heartfelt plea to > Remus to make his see she truly loves him. My reaction to her > was "What part of "no" don't you understand?" Jen: Haha! That's good. I actually liked that scene, figured with so much heartache going on and the inevitability of Order members being targeted after Dumbledore's death, Tonks was spurred on to make one last desperate plea. And without that scene, one of my all-time favorite poignant moments would be lost: 'But she wants you,' said Mr. Weasley with a small smile. 'And after all, Remus, young and whole men do not necessarily remain so.' He gestured sadly at his son, lying between them. Marianne: > We had examples of others suffering an unhealthy sort of love or > infatuation, and acting on it (Merope). We had the description of > the amortentia potion. We had the twins selling some sort of love > potion. We had Romilda, the fan-girl, trying to slip something to > Harry, and inadvertently affecting Ron. Is Tonks' affection for > Remus real, or another example of infatuation? Or is it an example > of love that may appear obsessive to some readers, but really > isn't? The jury is still out for me. Jen: Obsession was a major theme for more than just romantic pairings. Harry was certainly obsessed with Draco and I believe Dumbledore had an obsessive air about him with the horcrux hunt that could have further implications for the story. http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/146041 kchulpis writes in the post above about the healthy love going on, and that perhaps the shipping has a deeper meaning connected to the love theme than simply being light romance to break up the story. Tonks and Lupin appeared more on par with Ginny/Harry and Ron/Hermione to me, as couples with barriers to overcome before getting together. Jen From hickengruendler at yahoo.de Sat Jan 7 16:20:03 2006 From: hickengruendler at yahoo.de (hickengruendler) Date: Sat, 07 Jan 2006 16:20:03 -0000 Subject: Special treatment of Harry or not WAS:Re: Lessons in the book In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146055 > > Ceridwen: > My gripe is with the rule-breaking in ordinary incidents. Such as > talking in class, and wandering around after hours (with or without > cloak), sneaking into Hogsmeade despite warnings for his life in PoA > and suchlike. Hickengruendler: While it's undoubtly true that they are doing this, isn't this something totally normal for teenagers? I personally am glad that the protagonists (not counting the characters that are written as caricatures on purpose) despite being a bit stereotyped are also very normal and recognizable persons instead of some saints, who can do no wrong. And normally, when they are talking in class they do get points drawn. I really don't think something harmless like that needs to be punished with a detention, unless the student doesn't shut up during the whole lessons despite being told to do so. But I can't remember any scene in the books where a student did this. And whenever Harry is getting caught sneaking around he does get punished, with three exceptions. 1.) The one in CoS, where Harry and Ron told McGonagall, that they wanted to visit Hermione. And McGonagall was angry in the beginning, it was just that her good heart showed through and she could understand that Harry and Ron middes their friend and wanted to visit her. 2.) The scene with Lupin in PoA after Draco saw Harry in Hogsmeade. This comes closest to where I agree with you. Lupin probably should have punished him here, but he did manage to give him a bad conscience with just a few words at the very least, which I don't think some shouting and a detention by Snape would have done. 3.) The one where Moody saw Harry under his invisibility cloak in the chapter "The Egg and the Eye", and where he helped covering up for him. But we later learned that he wasn't Moody anyway and had his own reasons to do what he did. (And this scene did lead indirectly to Crouch junior getting the map and being able to kill his father before Dumbledore arrived, so it did have some very bad consequences). Ceridwen: > My other gripe is the cavalier attitude toward detention. Instead of > being ashamed that they broke the rules (in an ordinary manner), > they're offended that they are being disciplined. Hickengruendler: This is not entirely true. Harry and Hermione agreed, for example, that they did deserve the Detention in PS given by McGonagall. And like I said, those are teenagers and I find this pretty normal. The authorial voice is also a pretty tricky one, because most of the time (though not always) the authorial voice only presents us Harry's thoughts. Therefore it is a pretty biased one, and we recognize this all the times, where Harry has to recognize, that he has judged some people wrongly or without knowing the whole story. From annemehr at yahoo.com Sat Jan 7 17:27:00 2006 From: annemehr at yahoo.com (annemehr) Date: Sat, 07 Jan 2006 17:27:00 -0000 Subject: Breaking rules/House points Was:Re: First potions lesson/Harry getting special t In-Reply-To: <20060106144734.4239.qmail@web31701.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146056 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, An'nai Jiriki wrote: > > Annemehr: > > Given the difference in the way Hagrid talks about > > it before and after > > the kids' trip down the trapdoor it's clear he > > didn't realise the > > significance of what he'd done until afterward. Chris/Mezu(do you have preference?): > Yes, DD realized something, but we only hear of that > as a passing afterthought. If DD was the only one who > knew all the traps, that was irresponsible of him to > not let any other teacher know, especially with him > leaving the building. > > If Hagrid told DD about the stranger or Harry, DD > should have changed something to keep security. DD > was irresponsible here. > > Also, even if Hagrid realized his mistake afterwards, > after all he has been through, why would he not tell > DD he told others of Fluffy? Granted Hagrid is not > the sharpest tool in the shed, even children know when > something is extremely important and will tell even if > it gets them in trouble. Annemehr: I think you misunderstand me slightly; sorry if I wasn't clear. Hagrid never told DD about the fact he'd told a stranger about Fluffy because he never realised it was a security breach until after Harry had already gone down through the trap door. My point was that Hagrid was not purposely *concealing* anything from DD because he naively thought the stranger was irrelevant, just a passing wayfarer. That's just Hagrid (not being the sharpest tool, as you say). My evidence for this is Hagrid's complete change in demeanor after he *does* realise what he'd done: his tearful confession to Harry that it was all his fault. I don't know that it was irresponsible of DD not to let other teachers know about the traps, assuming they were "burglar alarms" of a sort. After all, one of the teachers responsible for a trap was the burglar himself. > > Chris: > > > Finally, the trio snuck out after hours. > > > > Annemehr: > > Again, condoned (by DD and JKR) in a good cause. > > The DA is another > > example (not after hours, but definitely against the > > rules). > > But children (and all Hogwarts students are children) > need to have defined boundaries. Only then can they > know they can cross them for a good cause. > > It's no wonder that Harry continously breaks the after > hours rule, it's not applied evenly. He only fears > Snape and McGonagall. No other teacher punishes him > for being out. I include Remus on this because even > his little speech about being out fell on deaf ears. Annemehr: Yes, children need to have boundaries. But people sometimes need to break the rules because it's right; it's just that the moral stakes are not usually so high in the lives of the RL children with which we're familiar. The discussion on the claims of following rules vs. breaking them for a higher moral purpose is being well explored in various threads these days; I'll just state that I agree with the position that breaking rules is sometimes necessary *and* that it is good for authorities to take these extenuating circumstances into account when it happens. Things are complicated by the fact that Harry sometimes blatantly breaks rules he shouldn't (and is punished whenever caught); sometimes breaks rules when he shouldn't yet he means well (trying to find out what Hagrid knows *this* time about the Chamber of Secrets) where the infraction is minor compared to more urgent concerns; and sometimes breaks rules when it's entirely appropriate. Sure, a kid could get confused -- but Percy doesn't break any rules, and he's confused too. I think Harry only fears Snape and McGonagall because Snape is the prowler-of-corridors after dark, and McGonagall is his head of house. > > Chris: > > > Also, the reasons DD gave for > > > awarding the points was pathetic: 'Cool use of > > > intellect', 'the best game of chess Hogwarts has > > ever > > > seen', 'Pure Love'. > > > > Annemehr (with benefit of book): > > Actually, it was "cool use of logic in the face of > > fire," "the best > > game of chess Hogwarts has seen in many years," and > > "pure nerve and > > outstanding courage." > > Thanks for the quotes, but my point still stands. The > deuling club in book 2 should have generated thousands > of points if that reasoning stands. I'm sure the chess > club has had its player that put on a good game from > time to time. I don't recall many point given in later > books for courage or nerve. > > I think the point the books make is that being normal > (reletively) is not important. > > > > Chris: > But not all Slyths are evil and following LV or Draco. > They are doing what is right and it certainly not > easy. Why are they not rewarded as well? > > And not all house points are awarded for doing > something right. Students receive points sometimes for > answering questions. Annemehr: Maybe part of the trouble is that we see so little of how the points are awarded. All houses wind up with hundreds of points -- how did they get them? Some are for quidditch wins, some are for answering questions correctly... maybe some are for chess club wins; we have no idea. I assume most of the points are awarded for doing ordinary things, and I think answering a question in class *is* doing something right -- at least it shows you did your homework or something. > To me the house points system only creates > competition, not cooperation. It will be very > unrealistic in the 7th book if all or some of the > house unite to defeat LV. Telling competing memeber to > work as a team never works under pressure, the > competition is just too strong. > > Mezu Annemehr: I don't know; there's no indication that the adults pay that much mind to who was in which House anymore. When more important things take your attention, House divisions may fall by the wayside. We could debate the merits of the House system (a British school instition still in some use today; JKR's school had houses), but to a British boarding school student it's most likely just a fact of life. In the HP books, however, we are very clearly progressing away from the House Cup being important at all, and three of the houses have been mingling and pulling together. The remaining problem, of course, is Slytherin which I maintian is Salazar's doing, not JKR's. Annemehr From annemehr at yahoo.com Sat Jan 7 17:51:25 2006 From: annemehr at yahoo.com (annemehr) Date: Sat, 07 Jan 2006 17:51:25 -0000 Subject: last minute points was Re: First potions lesson/Harry getting special treatment In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146057 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "potioncat" wrote: > > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "justcarol67" > wrote: > > > > Valky wrote: > snip > Gryffindor lost 150 points that was > > > rightfully earned because Draco deliberately schemed to ensure that > > > they did lose those points. > > > > Carol responds: > He was simply restoring > > the points that Draco had caused Gryffindor to lose. (Then again, > > Draco lost points for Slytherin, too, so maybe it's not quite as fair > > as it seems.) > > > Potioncat: > I'm going to look at this a slightly different way. Gryffindor lost 150 > points because McGonagall thought they were out of bounds late at night > and playing a trick on Draco. They were really out of bounds to help > Hagrid and Norbert. > > I'm going to speculate, that by the time of the feast, (If not sooner) > DD knows all about the dragon. I think his awarding points for courage > also counters the points they lost while doing a good deed. Not > that "Draco caused them to lose points, so I'll repay the kids" but > rather "The kids lost points while doing a good deed, and I will repay > them now." Although the 150 and 10 points were certainly earned. He > would most likely think they deserved points for helping Hagrid in such > a courageous way...but certainly could not reward them for it. > Annemehr: Oh, I don't know if I like that. I think Harry & co. deserved to lose the points for trying to do a good thing in the wrong way. They knew the dragon had to go and they knew Draco knew about it and would try to make trouble. They believed that their telling Dumbledore would be the same thing as Draco snitching. Heck, they even knew that Draco borrowed Ron's textbook that had Charlie's note giving the time and place in it. IMO, even if McGonagall knew the true story, she'd still be right to dock them (though I'm not betting that she actually would have). This makes a contrast to the points the Trio won in the end for breaking the after-hours rule *and* the third floor corridor rule with good reason. It's not that DD was righting an injustice here, it's that the trio had redeemed themselves and made up what they themselves had lost before. It's even more ironic if we believe that, left to himself, LV would never have got the Stone out of the Mirror, because in that case, the Trio earned the points for doing the *wrong* thing for the right reasons. Annemehr From annemehr at yahoo.com Sat Jan 7 18:27:18 2006 From: annemehr at yahoo.com (annemehr) Date: Sat, 07 Jan 2006 18:27:18 -0000 Subject: Special treatment - yes or no In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146058 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "sistermagpie" wrote: > There are times when the characters choose what they want to do > rather than what is right--James with Snape, for instance. But I > think those times when they make the wrong decision maybe are meant > to show that when they choose to do the right thing it's all their > decision too. So I feel like maybe she's saying it's good to be > independent and decide for yourself what's right and wrong, but that > doesn't always mean you'll make the correct decision. > > -m Annemehr: Exactly! Even the best of us sometimes purposely make the wrong decision: Harry does it, Snape does it, Draco does it. Dumbledore must do it (the PS/SS points? allowing Harry a broom in first year?). Unfortunately, even the best of us make the wrong decision despite our most sincere desires to do the right thing. OoP was the big book for that; it seems to have happened to everyone. Doing what's right is not at *all* easy when you can't even see what the right thing is. And judging *someone else's* decisions is all but impossible when 1)you don't know what reasoning went into them, and 2)even if you did, you may actually have decided differently. I think this will be one of Harry's final lessons to learn, via Snape, of course. Annemehr From kchuplis at alltel.net Sat Jan 7 14:48:31 2006 From: kchuplis at alltel.net (kchuplis) Date: Sat, 07 Jan 2006 14:48:31 -0000 Subject: Special treatment of Harry or not WAS:Re: Lessons in the book In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146059 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Ceridwen" wrote: > > Ceridwen: > > My other gripe is the cavalier attitude toward detention. Instead of > being ashamed that they broke the rules (in an ordinary manner), > they're offended that they are being disciplined. The hero, his best > friends, and the narration, all seem to say that detention is no big > deal, it's quite all right to have it, it proves your goodness > instead of proving that you were doing less than you could have done > to make the most of school. I don't know about the proving your goodness part, but in general the attitude toward detentions seems rather normal to me. Kids, no matter what, will feel 'hard done by' when punished, even if they know they have done wrong. (Somehow I find this perhaps the bud of adults where "it isn't MY fault" syndrome has bloomed into an entire litigious society who sue everyone for everything, but that's a different debate). What I found to be the most egregious case of "special treatment" in six books and treated *definitely* with a completely misplaced "hard done by" attitude, was Harry's detention in HBP for using the sectumsempra curse on Malfoy. Yes, Harry is certainly horrified, and definitely sorry; he listens to Snape with NO thought of leaving and waits 10 minutes for him to return and punish Harry. However, this is one incident in which our hero absolutely lies, deliberately hides evidence (as it were) and then dares to complain about the first detention being during the big match. Quite honestly, such a ghastly incident seemed to call for more than Saturday detentions the rest of the year. Granted he didn't *know* what the curse would do and Malfoy *was* about to use an unforgiveable curse, but there is only Harry's word for that. So it seems even in this case and with the dreaded Snape as the judge, Harry gets off awfully light in my opinion. It is maybe my one big disappointment in JKR's handling of character. To be quite honest it doesn't fit Harry's past behaviour, especially given how horrified he really does seem (rightfully so) with the type of curse he just used (yes, unknowingly) that he would even hesitate to just submit quietly to Snape's judgement. After all, he fully expected to be thrown in Azkaban for blowing up Aunt Marge and this was certainly worse than that, really. I think Harry would have shut up and been thankful that this was all that happened. Instead he even says he disagrees with the punishment. This scene is the one people should be most up in arms about in regard to special treatment and I'm very surprised no one's mentioned it. kchuplis From miles at martinbraeutigam.de Sat Jan 7 20:43:00 2006 From: miles at martinbraeutigam.de (Miles) Date: Sat, 7 Jan 2006 21:43:00 +0100 Subject: Special treatment - yes or no/Rules References: Message-ID: <009401c613ca$f4325a60$14b2a8c0@rechnerchen> No: HPFGUIDX 146060 Tonks wrote: > My own views are that JKR wants the reader and Harry to find the > higher law, the ancient law if you will. The law that is higher > than earthy governments or social norms. > I think that there are stages of moral development and that the > highest level would be shown in that person who could go against the > norm of their group, or their government to follow what they "know" > in their heart to be "right". > The person who follows the higher > course does not just break rules willy-nilly. They follow the rules > and customs like everyone else, until a rule or custom violated > the "higher" law. > JKR, IMO, wants us to learn along with Harry, to have the courage > along with Harry to follow the "higher road", and do what is right > over what is easy. Miles: I think you are very much concentrating on one side of this medal, totally forgetting about the other side. To make it clear, I just want to present you examples of people, who put what they felt was the "higher road" above the rules of society and the law of all societies, who chose to follow the higher law, and took the hard way instead of the easy way: the terrorists of 9/11. No, I do not want to equalise or even compare Harry to terrorists. But it really is a problem to present it as a good thing to break a rule because in your own estimation this rule is wrong - in general or in the specific situation. The problem arises with "you own estimation". Maybe there really is something like an ancient law that all human beings can feel. But obviously, many people do not listen properly, or they feel very different things about it. Ethics, rules of right and wrong, are not globalised. Furthermore, there is only small consensus about it inside the many societies of our world. Maybe there are not so much people thinking about ethics at all, but each of them will come up with his/her personal ethics, strongly influenced by the cultural environments these persons live in. Besides ethics, there is morale in every society [I hope this distinction works in English as it does in German - if not, native speakers please comment]. Morale is the sum of the written and unwritten rules in a society (verbalised very roughly) - in the Potterverse we heard of Ministry's laws, Hogwarts' rules, some ancient wizard's rules and indirectly about rules for love affairs/engagements. Morale is in some ways like coagulated ethics - it is solid or viscoes, whereas ethics can change very fast within a changing world or due to special situations. To come back from my amateur philosophy to Tonks' mail, there are certainly situations, when morale and ethics are conflicting. And due to the corrupt society of Potterverse, this happens not only occasionally in the HP series. But a stricken morale can still work for a society, so even the Chosen One should respect it. If he openly refuses to do so, why shouldn't Draco follow his own set of rules as well? Or Umbridge? To follow rules is not just a lazy thing to do, the easy way, or stupid. Every society will cease to exist without a set of rules and laws that is respected by a vast majority. Yes, sometimes it really is necessary to break the law or a rule to do the RIGHT thing. But even then you have to take the responsibility for it, because your decision can destabilise the society you live in. Miles, who really likes to play advocatus diaboli, even if he has to become a moralist for it From foodiedb at optonline.net Sat Jan 7 20:00:31 2006 From: foodiedb at optonline.net (foodiedb) Date: Sat, 07 Jan 2006 20:00:31 -0000 Subject: Filch Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146061 Hi All, I am rather new at this, so I just wanted to take a moment and say thanks for answering all of my questions, many of which I am sure have already been asked numerous times. All of your kindness is greatly appreciated. Okay, one question and one statement. Question: I was thinking about Champber of Secrets when Dumbledore has to stop Filch from going after Harry. Filch had yelled that he was gonna kill Harry, and it seemed as if he was angry enough to do it. I was wondering why Dumbledore would allow someone such as that to stay on at Hogwarts. Statement: Even though Filch is such an unlikeable character, he is that kind of character that it is very enjoyable not to like. And, it seems as though in the Goblet of Fire movie that they have made him into more of a joke then I'd like to see. Have a great day, DB From foodiedb at optonline.net Sat Jan 7 20:05:48 2006 From: foodiedb at optonline.net (foodiedb) Date: Sat, 07 Jan 2006 20:05:48 -0000 Subject: Comprehensive Horcrux List/Top 10 Horcrux List Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146062 Hi, Can someone please tell me (or let me know where I can find) the most recent comprehenisive list of what everyone thinks might be horcruxes...or if that's too much to list, how bout' a Horcrux Top Ten? Thanks, DB From lindseyharrisst at hotmail.com Sat Jan 7 21:24:57 2006 From: lindseyharrisst at hotmail.com (lindseyharrisst) Date: Sat, 07 Jan 2006 21:24:57 -0000 Subject: Let's talk about Lupin In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146063 Thank you very much Marianne, You actually articulated my point better than I did, lol. The previous replies focused on the nature of love as if the chracters were real and independent, neglecting the fact that they are written and that they function as part of a story arc and their relationship should serve a narrative purpose, show a facet of chracter or advance the story somehow. I agree with everything you said. I struggle with this idea and genuinely don't know the answer - can what an author meant to write actualy not be the best/ most reasonable or "true" way of interpreting a scene or peice of dialogue. There maybe isn't an answer. I have no doubt JK meant us to believe in Tonks/ Lupin, but I am also sure that she's actually made her own chracter act OC! Can the readership rebel? Probably not, but the fic community jolly well can! --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "kiricat4001" wrote: > > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "lindseyharrisst" > wrote: > > > > I did ask this when the book had only just come out an ddidn't get > > much response (I imagine because the death issue and snape's > loyalty > > were the most striking points) - What does the group think of the > > Lupin shipping in HBP? I contend that it is... > > a. not foreshadowed or calculable, even in retrospect, contrary to > > most things in the books, esp. shipping > > b. because it is a narrative afterthought it was not well thought > out, > > what good could Lupin and Tonks see in each other (over being with > > someone else, or alone)? > > c. does it seem in chracter for Lupin to fall in love (and with > Tonks)? > > d. Do you think it's authentic love on his or her part? > > I confess to having a belief he should be with another, but that > > aside, I just don't see the point. > > Marianne: > > Well, yes, I don't see why Lupin couldn't fall in love, and I don't > necessarily think that Lupin and Tonks couldn't be a perfectly > happpy couple. But, this pairing didn't work at all for me as > written. So, for the purposes of this discussion I guess you and I > are on the same page. > > Lupin struck me as "off" in HBP, compared to the way he felt to me > from previous books. That whole speech at the Burrow at Christmas > about how he neither likes nor dislikes Snape, his outing as a > werewolf would have happened anyway - why blame Snape, he (Lupin) > must be grateful for any crumbs that fall his way, etc. It was as > if he was chanting these things in his head to convince himself they > were true. His whole manner of speech struck me as overly formal, > almost stilted. > > But, to get to the Tonks thing, I agree, I felt it came out of left > field. It felt tacked on to me, as if JKR suddenly decided not only > to pair these two off, but to use this as another facet of the theme > of obsessive love, but an obsessive love that turns out okay. > > Tonks appears perfectly fine when Harry arrives at the station at > the end of OoP, and then, a fortnight later when he sees her upon > arriving at the Burrow, she's in her full-blown funk, including the > loss of her Metamorphagus powers. She remains colorless, distracted, > almost listless every time we see her after that. > > The denoument of Tonks' problem as it was revealed in the Hospital > scene was as jarring to me as someone suddenly dropping an armload > of pots and pans on the floor. I thought her timing was horrendous. > Here she is, browbeating the man she is supposedly in love with, who > is currently reeling from the death of the person who gave him more > opportunities to succeed in life, despite being a werewolf, than > anyone else. She tries to force him to address their relationship, > or lack of it, at this very emotional moment, in front of a bunch of > other people. Now, maybe we're supposed to read this as Tonks > desperately making a final, heartfelt plea to Remus to make his see > she truly loves him. My reaction to her was "What part of "no" don't > you understand?" > > Whether this is indeed true love on the part of Tonks has also not > been proved to me. This gets back to the concept of obsessive love. > We had examples of others suffering an unhealthy sort of love or > infatuation, and acting on it (Merope). We had the description of > the amortentia potion. We had the twins selling some sort of love > potion. We had Romilda, the fan-girl, trying to slip something to > Harry, and inadvertently affecting Ron. Is Tonks' affection for > Remus real, or another example of infatuation? Or is it an example > of love that may appear obsessive to some readers, but really > isn't? The jury is still out for me. > > Finally, Remus never struck me as being in love with Tonks. Yes, > he's reticent and closed-off, and had he dropped to one knee in the > Hospital wing and asked Tonks to marry him, I'd have gone blind from > terminal eye-rolling. However, we also know that Remus has the > weakness of wanting people to like him. Once everyone sort of > ganged up on him in the Hospital, I got the feeling that it was > easier for him to just surrender than to insist in front of all his > colleagues that he really wasn't in love with Tonks. So, the > authenticity of his affection for her is also an open question, IMO. > > The fact that they appeared to be holding hands at DD's funeral did > not send signals of a happy couple in love to me, either. However, > as Tonks had apparently regained her Metamorphagus ability, I think > we're supposed to believe that she and Remus are now officially a > couple. Permit me to roll my eyes a bit... > > Marianne > From fuzz876i at yahoo.com Sat Jan 7 15:36:40 2006 From: fuzz876i at yahoo.com (fuzz876i) Date: Sat, 07 Jan 2006 15:36:40 -0000 Subject: SHIP: Re: Lupin/Tonks Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146064 Snapesangel: > What does the group think of the Lupin shipping in HBP? I > contend that it is... > > b. because it is a narrative afterthought it was not well > thought out, what good could Lupin and Tonks see in each > other (over being with someone else, or alone)? > c. does it seem in character for Lupin to fall in love > (and with Tonks)? > d. Do you think it's authentic love on his or her part? "fuzz876i": Voldemort created so much hatred and despair including putting a nine year old under the Imperius Curse and killing one child with a werewolf. Why couldn't Lupin love Tonks in this world gone mad? Those that were gathered around Bill's bed in the hospital wing realized that Dumbledore was dead; they were making statements as to what he would have wanted. The one reason the killing curse bounded off Harry onto Lord Voldemort was because of his mother's self-sacrifice. This being said, people that can love and be loved can ultimately help destroy Lord Voldemort. So why can't Tonks truly love Lupin? In this world of destruction it is better to love than hate because if you hate then it makes it easier to become a Death Eater. From zgirnius at yahoo.com Sat Jan 7 22:06:25 2006 From: zgirnius at yahoo.com (zgirnius) Date: Sat, 07 Jan 2006 22:06:25 -0000 Subject: Special treatment of Harry or not WAS:Re: Lessons in the book In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146065 kchuplis wrote: > It is maybe my one big disappointment in JKR's handling of character. To be quite > honest it doesn't fit Harry's past behaviour, especially given how horrified he really > does seem (rightfully so) with the type of curse he just used (yes, unknowingly) that > he would even hesitate to just submit quietly to Snape's judgement. After all, he fully > expected to be thrown in Azkaban for blowing up Aunt Marge and this was certainly > worse than that, really. I think Harry would have shut up and been thankful that this > was all that happened. Instead he even says he disagrees with the punishment. This > scene is the one people should be most up in arms about in regard to special > treatment and I'm very surprised no one's mentioned it. zgirnius: (I hope this is not a second post on the same topic...Yahoomort seems to have swallowed my firt attempt!) I, too, was very much struck by this scene. But having now reread the chapter a couple of times and having given the matter some thought, I disagree that Harry's behavior in it is out of character. As you point out, Harry's initial horrified reaction to what he has done is very true to our expectations. Everything changes when Snape arrives on the scene. I believe that from that point on, Harry's behavior is driven not by denial of his own guilt (which he does recognize, for example, later that evening when talking with his friends), but by his hatred of Snape. At the end of OotP, Harry decides that Snape is to blame for the death of Sirius, which brings his hatred of Snape to a new level. We are reminded of this hatred by the narrator in HBP in the first scene where Snape appears, when he meets Tonks and Harry at the door to Hogwarts. In the first DADA class we are shown, Harry sees Snape's opening lecture in the worst light. (Hermione sees it as similar in approach to Harry's DA classes.) And he refuses to accord Snape any respect as a teacher despite the consequences (his wiseass remark 'you don't have to call me "sir"'). The one other mention of Snape's class (the dementor essay) again shows Harry refusing to accept anything from Snape, and refusing to back down. (We are not in a position to evaluate Snape's alternative approach...but Harry was certainly in a position to write his essay differently if he so chose.) So in the Sectumsempra scene, Harry refuses to admit any wrongdoing to Snape. In my opinion, because it is Snape, not because he believes himself to be in the right. Likewise, Snape has the authority to punish Harry, and Harry certainly has to go along in the sense of serving whatever detentions he is assigned. But he is not going to verbally accept Snape's judgement. Again, because it is Snape. To me this echoes Harry's interactions with Umbridge in OotP. Not because Harry was in the wrong there too. But because he exhibits the same stubborn pride in his behavior towards both teachers. (Hermione also despises Umbridge. But she does her homework, raises her hand and maintains a civil tone in class in her dealings with Umbridge.) And a few days later, Harry has probably decided that it was not such a big deal after all, because Draco is almost immediately back to normal. That this is due to Snape's prompt arrival and use of what must have been either a powerful healing spell or a specific countercurse to Sectumsempra does not seem to cross Harry's mind. Which is yet another example of refusing to see anything about Snape except his hatred of the man. From lowndes at bigpond.net.au Sat Jan 7 21:45:53 2006 From: lowndes at bigpond.net.au (Marg McKay-Lowndes) Date: Sun, 8 Jan 2006 07:45:53 +1000 Subject: Let's talk about Lupin In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <000201c613d3$bd1f2540$0100000a@lan> No: HPFGUIDX 146066 Lindseyharris wrote: The previous replies focused on the nature of love as if the chracters were real and independent, neglecting the fact that they are written and that they function as part of a story arc and their relationship should serve a narrative purpose, show a facet of chracter or advance the story somehow. MML: I agree that the relationship between Tonks and Lupin should serve some narrative purpose. Surely in this case, it is to mirror Ginny/Harry in that Harry chilvalrously breaks up with Ginny to protect her from LV in the same way that Lupin, despite genuine feelings for Tonks, will not be drawn into a relationship with her out of chivalrous regard (misplaced?) for her. IE, he cares for her so much that he doesn't want her to have to put up with the drawbacks of being with a werewolf. Perhaps the fact that they end up together foreshadows the Ginny/Harry pairing, in saying that despite the fact that Harry has to confront LV, he and Ginny will end up together just as Tonks and Lupin have, despite Lupin's werewolfness. I don't think this comes out of left field, as we see early in the book that Tonks has a problem. She has a heart to heart with Molly early in the book, but the reader doesn't know what this is about at the time. Cheers MML From horridporrid03 at yahoo.com Sat Jan 7 22:52:33 2006 From: horridporrid03 at yahoo.com (horridporrid03) Date: Sat, 07 Jan 2006 22:52:33 -0000 Subject: Last minute points / JKR's view of it (was:Re: Special treatment - yes or no) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146067 > >>Potioncat: > > If on the other hand, Harry is coming in late (as he is) and > incorrectly assumes that the colors reflect the new winner of the > House Cup, we have a different event. We have the hall decorated > in the colors of last year's winner, Slytherin. Slytherin also > happens to be the leader at the moment. > Betsy Hp: Again, a lovely explanation, but again, it goes against canon. In two different books, four years apart, we are told that the hall is decorated in the colors of the winning house for the Leaving Feast. "[The Great Hall] was decked out in the Slytherin colors of green and silver to celebrate Slytherin's winning of the house cup for the seventh year in a row." (SS scholastic paperback ed. p.304) "The Great Hall was normally decorated with the winning House's colors for the Leaving Feast." (GoF scholastic hardback ed p.720) By his fourth year I'd expect Harry to have a pretty good handle on Hogwart's traditions. And yes, I agree with those who point out that an actual *law* wasn't broken, and yes, the points were deserved. But Dumbledore broke a tradition in such a way that he humiliated Slytherin. (For example: It's traditional but not legally required for the groom to say "I do" at the wedding ceremony, not, "actually, I'm madly in love with your sister". ) I doubt he did it deliberately or maliciously, but none the less, he did it. Personally, the only way I can explain it is that Dumbledore was so thrilled that Harry had done so well, and felt so guilty about his little Norbert test.... [Oh, an aside is needed here: I theorize that Dumbledore used the Norbert incident to test Harry's mettle (his loyalty, etc.) rather than the Stone gauntlet. It makes more sense to me that Dumbledore use a test that threatened House points rather than children's lives.] The outcome of the Norbert incident was so bad for Harry (despised by his House, quidditch becomes an agony) and I think that probably bothered Dumbledore quite a bit. So he gave Harry, who was a boy beyond his wildest hopes I'm sure, a really, really special surprise that included a lot of cheering and ceremony, etc. > >>Potioncat: > > The fact that Snape was smiling or at least faking a smile makes > me think we've made a bigger deal of this than anyone else has. > Betsy Hp: For me it's a part of a pattern. In and of itself it's a horribly rude moment, but as Steve pointed out, crap happens. You have to roll with the punches. Snape rolls. And while I think it confirmed the "Slytherin as outsiders" for the members of that house, I doubt any of them became suicidal or anything. It was a slap in the face, yes, but not the end of the world. However, it does set up Slytherins not being all that fond of Dumbledore. And it does give us a hint that Slytherin may not be too upset if an outsider came in and gave Dumbledore a hard time. That they may in fact, have welcomed a new sheriff in town. Was this Dumbledore's intended outcome? I really, really doubt it. As I said before, Dumbledore is incredibly weak at recognizing and dealing with rivalry. He fails at it again and again. So I'm quite sure he was concentrating on his pride and love for Harry and giving little to no thought on the dignity of Slytherin. Which is why the Sorting Hat tells us that there's been little to no process in the uniting of the Houses, even under the leadership of Dumbledore. Was this JKR's intended outcome? That's the trickier question, isn't it. I mean, yes the moment was high drama and a wonderful prize for Harry and friends. It also helped them escape their roles as House pariahs. But it does give Slytherin a hit, as shown by Draco's reaction (and Snape's for that matter). At the moment, and especially in PS/SS, Slytherin *is* the scapegoat. They are the source of all that is wrong in the WW. So hits are deserved. But did JKR mean for them to remain in that state? Does she believe Slytherin *deserves* to be the scapegoat? When she wrote Hagrid saying that not a wizard went bad that wasn't in Slytherin, she *knew* that Peter Pettigrew proved that statement a lie. When she has Harry assume that Draco was another Dudley, she knew that wasn't a completely correct assumption. So when she wrote the Leaving Feast in PS/SS did she feel a bit of sympathy for Slytherin? Sympathy Harry was unable to share at that moment, but sympathy he'd eventually come to feel? I doubt we can come to any satisfactory conclusions on JKR's views on these things until the final book is written. But it is fun theorize. Betsy Hp From katmac at katmac.cncdsl.com Sat Jan 7 22:53:05 2006 From: katmac at katmac.cncdsl.com (lagattalucianese) Date: Sat, 07 Jan 2006 22:53:05 -0000 Subject: Lupin and Filch and This and That Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146068 DB wrote: > ...And, it seems as though in the Goblet of Fire movie that they > have made him into more of a joke then I'd like to see. La Gatta Lucianese: Awww...I loved the scene where he was waltzing with Mrs. Norris! Lupin Question (also from La Gatta Lucianese): Lupin is a werewolf because he was bitten by Fenrir Greyback (HBP.16) because his father had offended Fenrir. However, I wonder if there were other factors involved. His family name is, after all, Lupin, and his parents (willingly or unwillingly) have named him Remus; both names have strong wolf connotations. I wonder if he actually comes from a family of werewolves, and what his father did to offend Fenrir (and the werewolf community generally) was refuse to allow Remus to be bitten, hoping that if he did not become a werewolf, he would be able to lead a normal life in wizarding society. Naturally this would offend Fenrir, and more to the point Lupin's extended family, who would increase their attempts to see that the boy was bitten and brought into the fold, so to speak, knowing that in spite of his parents' efforts (Poa.18), there was no cure for the bite of a werewolf. (I speak from experience here; my father was an apostate from the Mormon faith, and the rest of his family made it their life's work to see that my sister and I were converted and baptized by the time we were eight years old, very much against our father's wishes.) From coriolan at worldnet.att.net Sat Jan 7 23:02:08 2006 From: coriolan at worldnet.att.net (Caius Marcius) Date: Sat, 07 Jan 2006 23:02:08 -0000 Subject: FILK: No Life Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146069 No Life To the tune of That's Life, a Frank Sinatra favorite http://www.kmelmidimusic.com/sinatra/TRIBUTE.htm AN INFERIUS (and Chorus of Female Inferi) No life (No life!), that's what we Inferi find I try to make a killing Meeting dead-lines 'Cause you know since I have left the grave That I've been on watch, on watch in this cave I said, no life, (no life!), and though it don't amount to shucks Some people get their kicks Swipin' a Horcrux But though I may get, may get water-logged I must get impelled in anti-Potter mobs I've been a corpse, a cadaver, a carcass, A zombie, untombed and undead. I've been hexed and hacked and hammered and hit And shot full of lead. I still pursue my foes, livid with hate, Despite this persistent vegetative state No life (No life!), I'll fill ya with such repulsion You'll see me being creepy With no heart beat and with no pulse, son And although I might lack in every vital sign I am helping out the Dark Lord and his Plan Nine I've fought with Harry J. Potter, and Albus P. Dumble, and ol' R.A.B. They snuck in, got through, and grabbed it, got out And went home scott-free: I rallied all my hordes to mangle and to maim But they drove us back with red-hot rings of flame No life (No life!), No life and we lost the locket Ev'ry time I thought we'd cut `em off But we couldn't block it So it may be when Voldy learns of our defeats He's gonna curse us all out as a bunch of dead-beats - CMC HARRY POTTER FILKS http://home.att.net/~coriolan/hpfilks.htm From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Sat Jan 7 23:08:36 2006 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Sat, 07 Jan 2006 23:08:36 -0000 Subject: Special treatment of Harry or not /Rules In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146070 > Ceridwen: > My gripe is with the rule-breaking in ordinary incidents. Such as > talking in class, and wandering around after hours (with or without > cloak), sneaking into Hogsmeade despite warnings for his life in PoA > and suchlike. While I do see the point of Saving The World, as in > entering the seven challenges in SS/PS, or the Chamber in CoS, I > don't think Harry should get a pass for ordinary infractions just > because he's The Boy Who Lived. Alla: I actually completely agree with you - I believe that Harry should NOT be given a pass for ordinary breaking of the rules AND I don't believe that he IS given a pass for the most part at least. IMO of course. Take the earlier example with Remus lecturing him after sneaking into Hogsmead. As I said I think Remus' lecture WAS a perfect punishment, because it shamed Harry AND I think he took to heart Remus' words that it is a "poor way to repay Harry's parents for their sacrifice" (paraphrasing here, although I think it is pretty close). On the other hand, I totally think that if Snape gave Harry detention after this, Harry may have sneaked into Hogsmeade again just to prove to Snape that he could. :-) Having said that, I think that JKR makes a clear distinction between breaking rules for fun of it ( which IMO she disapproves of, but acknowledges that children will do it anyway) and the breaking of the rules for higher selfless purposes that may eventually lead to changes in corrupt society or simply save innocent lives. Miles: Yes, sometimes it really is necessary to break the law or a rule to do the > RIGHT thing. But even then you have to take the responsibility for it, > because your decision can destabilize the society you live in. Alla: IMO, It depends on what kind of responsibility you are talking about. Because sometimes corrupted society should be a bit destabilized to initiate change ( no, I am not advocating revolution a la Russian Bolsheviks or something like that), BUT the acts of civil disobedience sometimes are a good thing if society is corrupt or some things in society are corrupt IMO. So, if standing up against bad things in society means that those people should give up themselves to the mercy of such society, I guess I disagree. If on the other hand you are simply talking about taking responsibility in a sense of acknowledging that these "rebels" are doing those things, I guess I agree with it. I think I would look at it in context, depending on whether their life and liberty would be threatened, if they took such responsibility. Oh, maybe sometimes one is prepared to have his life and liberty threatened for doing a right thing. Not sure, have to think about it. So, going back to Harry Potter, if you are arguing for example that Dumbledore Army needed to come clean with Umbridge because their existence undermined her authority, I would disagree, because IMO Umbridge had the authority to do many bad things to the kids and them acknowledging their existence as defense club ( which eventually came out anyway as we all know) and what is the most important to me - her authority needed to be undermined and again as we all know whole school eventually did it. We see what Fred and George did, right? They took responsibility for their actions, but when they were out of Umbridge reach and I get a feeling that JKR REALLY approved of what they did in that scene. IMO obviously. SPEW is another example of possible social change that dear Hermione advocates and (I know that opinions here differ widely) I think that JKR advocates it too. She pretty much said it in the interviews that house elves equals slavery (if I remember correctly), so I think that the end resolution of the house elves situation would not be that "house elves only want to serve humans anyway and humans just need to treat them nicely", but " house elves can be free if they want to", or something like that. Hermione takes responsibility for SPEW, but she is not going to be arrested or anything, she is just teased for this, so no disproportional harm could be done to her, so I think JKR thinks that this kind of responsibility kids should take - as in if you believe in something, say it. Again, I have to think it over. JMO, Alla From gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk Sat Jan 7 23:35:54 2006 From: gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk (Geoff Bannister) Date: Sat, 07 Jan 2006 23:35:54 -0000 Subject: Filch In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146071 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "foodiedb" wrote: DB: > Hi All, > I am rather new at this, so I just wanted to take a moment and say > thanks for answering all of my questions, many of which I am sure have > already been asked numerous times. All of your kindness is greatly > appreciated. Okay, one question and one statement. > > Question: I was thinking about Champber of Secrets when Dumbledore > has to stop Filch from going after Harry. Filch had yelled that he > was gonna kill Harry, and it seemed as if he was angry enough to do > it. I was wondering why Dumbledore would allow someone such as that > to stay on at Hogwarts. Geoff: This is just the sort of hyperbole that we all indulge in from time to time.... Like a friend of mine who will occasionally come out with a remark such as "I'll kill that brother of mine when I get my hands on him..." after some minor disagreement between them. From zarleycat at sbcglobal.net Sun Jan 8 01:20:02 2006 From: zarleycat at sbcglobal.net (kiricat4001) Date: Sun, 08 Jan 2006 01:20:02 -0000 Subject: Let's talk about Lupin In-Reply-To: <000201c613d3$bd1f2540$0100000a@lan> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146072 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Marg McKay-Lowndes" wrote: > > MML: > I agree that the relationship between Tonks and Lupin should serve > some narrative purpose. Surely in this case, it is to mirror Ginny/Harry in > that Harry chilvalrously breaks up with Ginny to protect her from LV in the > same way that Lupin, despite genuine feelings for Tonks, will not be drawn > into a relationship with her out of chivalrous regard (misplaced?) for her. > IE, he cares for her so much that he doesn't want her to have to put up with > the drawbacks of being with a werewolf. Perhaps the fact that they end up > together foreshadows the Ginny/Harry pairing, in saying that despite the > fact that Harry has to confront LV, he and Ginny will end up together just > as Tonks and Lupin have, despite Lupin's werewolfness. > > I don't think this comes out of left field, as we see early in the book that > Tonks has a problem. She has a heart to heart with Molly early in the book, > but the reader doesn't know what this is about at the time. Marianne: All well and good, but from my perspective as a reader, I have not seen any indication of *Lupin's* feelings. Yes, we see early and often that Tonks is laboring under some sort of problem. But we see nothing of Lupin that suggests, IMO, that he's ever returned Tonks's feelings. He's pensive by the fireside at Christmas, but that's when he seems most oddly un-Lupin-like to me. All we seen from him directly with regards to his own feelings towards Tonks, and from his own mouth, is that he's tried to push her away. You may very well be right in all of your comments. But, to me, the case for a couple in love is lacking from the behavior and words of one half of the couple, which gets back to lindsay's original comments of this not being one of those pairings that's been foreshadowed. Marianne From greatraven at hotmail.com Sun Jan 8 02:21:13 2006 From: greatraven at hotmail.com (sbursztynski) Date: Sun, 08 Jan 2006 02:21:13 -0000 Subject: Snape again/Love and Vengeance/Ending In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146073 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Tonks" wrote: > > I have not been able to read or post over the past few months. But > I have been thinking about a few things and I think it might fit in > this thread. Saw the Narnia movie and saw some of HP there. I think > that JKR was influenced by Lewis. In any event here are my most > current musings: > > I think that book 7 with have Harry making a sacrifice for, of all > people, Snape. I am not sure how it will get to that point, but if > DD made a sacrifice for Draco, it would make sense that Harry would > for Snape. > > If Harry is Everyman, and DD is the alchemist (ah, I hate to say > it maybe Han's is right. It IS all about Alchemy,), then in order > for Harry to reach to the level of DD and become a fully realized > human being, he will have to die for his enemy. He will have to > place Love above all else. > > Sue here: Ooh, Snape would HATE that! Think about how long and grudgingly he carried this "life debt" to James because he'd saved him from wolf Lupin, till he could repay it to Harry! Now, imagine him having another debt and not being able to repay it... No doubt this will please those fans who hate Snape - the adult ones, anyway - but would it be a satisfying conclusion to the series? The major difference in the Narnia tale is that by the time Aslan sacrifices himself, Edmund has long ago concluded he made a major mistake, that the White Witch is crazy and has to be opposed. If Harry sacrificed himself for Snape, Snape would never, ever forgive him, IMO. :-) From foxmoth at qnet.com Sun Jan 8 02:32:08 2006 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Sun, 08 Jan 2006 02:32:08 -0000 Subject: Let's talk about Lupin In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146074 > > Marianne: > > All well and good, but from my perspective as a reader, I have not > seen any indication of *Lupin's* feelings. Yes, we see early and > often that Tonks is laboring under some sort of problem. But we see > nothing of Lupin that suggests, IMO, that he's ever returned Tonks's > feelings. He's pensive by the fireside at Christmas, but that's > when he seems most oddly un-Lupin-like to me. All we seen from him > directly with regards to his own feelings towards Tonks, and from > his own mouth, is that he's tried to push her away. > > You may very well be right in all of your comments. But, to me, the > case for a couple in love is lacking from the behavior and words of > one half of the couple, which gets back to lindsay's original > comments of this not being one of those pairings that's been > foreshadowed. Pippin: Let me ask, if I'm right and Lupin was turned by Voldemort, forced to kill Sirius and cooperate with The Plan in order to keep this secret...isn't his behavior in HBP just what you'd expect? Distant, stilted, non-committal, staring into the fire, and a sudden wild outburst of emotion when it all goes wrong *again* (from the pov of a reluctant DE who was expecting Draco to fail and Snape to die) and Dumbledore is killed? Pippin From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Sun Jan 8 02:50:03 2006 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Sun, 08 Jan 2006 02:50:03 -0000 Subject: Essays about Snape on Lexicon Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146075 If you guys have not seen it yet, there are three new essays about Snape on Lexicon. Well, relatively new. They were posted on December 29, 2005, I think. Two of them are about Good!Snape ( why Snape changed allegiance and why he killed Dumbledore) http://www.hp-lexicon.org/essays/essay-snapes-change-of-allegiance.html http://www.hp-lexicon.org/essays/essay-shaken-not-stirred.html and one about Evil!Snape http://www.hp-lexicon.org/essays/essay-the-marks-of-a-villain.html Now, of course I like the one about Evil!Snape the most, but NOT just because I like Evil!Snape the most. ( Although of course I DO like Evil Snape - not really believe that completely Evil!Snape will reemerge at the end, but would love to) It is just I have not found any new arguments in the first two - one basically argues that Snape loved Lily and that is why changed allegiance to Good ( in essense, IMO) and another basically argues that Dumbledore asked Snape to kill him because of UV and that Snape would be more valuable alive. Basically I did not see anything that we did not discuss here. The one about Evil!Snape though while also has a lot of what we discuss, has (IMO at least) some new arguments or at least subarguments. Like when she argues that possible loophole in the UV and Snape not taking advantage of it may point to Evil!Snape. There is another interesting point, but I am not sure she is necessarily correct here. Did Snape indeed see Peter on the Map? Because if he did, his behaviour in the Shack indeed goes from insane to malicious to me. IMO of course. In any event, IMO this essay also makes a lot of conclusions which could be argued against, but overall I liked it a lot. JMO, Alla From zgirnius at yahoo.com Sun Jan 8 03:44:39 2006 From: zgirnius at yahoo.com (zgirnius) Date: Sun, 08 Jan 2006 03:44:39 -0000 Subject: Essays about Snape on Lexicon In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146076 zgirnius: Thanks for the links, I always enjoy a nice Snape essay. Alla wrote: > The one about Evil!Snape though while also has a lot of what we > discuss, has (IMO at least) some new arguments or at least > subarguments. > > Like when she argues that possible loophole in the UV and Snape not > taking advantage of it may point to Evil!Snape. zgirnius: Yes, I liked that. I've never seen this point used for Evil!Snape before. The existence of the loophole in the Vow has been noted by Good!Snape folks around here, though, as a reason why Good!Snape did not back out of the Vow when Narcissa added the third clause. (The lack of use of the loophole gets explained by the idea that Snape was working with Dumbledore on just such a plan as the author of the essay suggests, and they did not account for drinking the Potion in the Cave and the presence of Death Eaters that night...) Alla: > There is another interesting point, but I am not sure she is > necessarily correct here. > > Did Snape indeed see Peter on the Map? Because if he did, his > behaviour in the Shack indeed goes from insane to malicious to me. IMO > of course. zgirnius: The author uses a word like maybe/perhaps. I got the impression she is speculating. If Snape IS a villain it would be a nice touch. I am of course convinced that Snape had no idea Pettigrew was still alive. He was thus insanely angry with Sirius, whom he sincerely believed to the the betrayer of the Potters. (Which mattered greatly to him because he loved Lily, or wanted to clear his debt to James, or both. And he had gone to some difficulty to protect the Potters from the consequences of his own evil action...) From va32h at comcast.net Sun Jan 8 03:44:47 2006 From: va32h at comcast.net (va32h) Date: Sun, 08 Jan 2006 03:44:47 -0000 Subject: Let's talk about Lupin In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146077 At the end of OoTP, I had developed a theory that Lupin and Sirius were a couple. I know - that seems totally out of left field, and JKR would not write an openly gay couple into her "children's" story, but I thought the subtext was there. I had always seen Lupin's being a werewolf as analagous to homosexuality ("parents won't want someone like me teaching their children"). Sirius and Lupin lived together at Grimmauld Place, gave Harry a Christmas gift from the both of them, and just the way they spoke to each other and interacted.... But obviously that is not where JKR chose to go. I am not unhappy with the Lupin/Tonks pairing - it's just a bit of an "eh - so what" for me. I did think the hospital scene was ridiculous, however. Tonks showed how immature she is - and rather selfish too. Dumbledore is dead, everyone is grieving and concerned for Bill, and all Tonks can think about is that her boyfriend has dumped her. That scene did nothing to elevate my opinion of Tonks. va32h From nrenka at yahoo.com Sun Jan 8 03:50:15 2006 From: nrenka at yahoo.com (nrenka) Date: Sun, 08 Jan 2006 03:50:15 -0000 Subject: Real child abuse In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146078 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "horridporrid03" wrote: > Betsy Hp: > I'm really uncomfortable with that sort of philosophy. Rather than > using rules fairly applied to everybody, some rules are made for > one sort of person and other rules are made for another sort. So, > Draco deserves to be physically tortured because of who he is. But > Neville should never be challanged because of who he is. Hagrid is > allowed to physically endanger his students. Snape is not allowed > to emotionally endanger his. Someone posted something not long ago in response to this statement or one like it bringing up Kant, but I think they typoed/got it off incomplete, so the search doesn't find it. (Chocolate to anyone who finds it for me, because I like to cite things?) Yeesh, go on vacation mostly netless for a week, and see what happens. But it got me thinking. What Betsy proposes here is very Kantian: rules are rules and they apply perfectly equally to everyone. There's profound reason behind Kant's argument for principles pretty much like this, and it's an attractive thing to think about in many ways. But getting to what Lupinlore posted about JKR and individuality (145707), I have to bring up *the* major hole in Kant: social relations. Kant doesn't talk about government. He doesn't talk about civil society, and he doesn't deal with things like trust issues and relationships. And this, as I see it, is much of what JKR is really interested in. [The famous reductio in Kant is that he argues in complete sincerity that it's immoral to lie about your friend's location to someone who has come to kill them, because lying is utterly contraindicated by the categorial imperative.] And her morality really *is* quite situational and considers character as a fundamental issue. I'd say yes, some things are okay when done by some people and not by others, thanks to the context. Correct motivation matters a great deal, for one thing (and we can use Kant there, for sure). Methods, too. However, what sets this apart from the DEs is that a different set of criteria is used, based on people's character and actions rather than any abstract blood quality. You may find that a distinction without a difference, but it's the one I see running through the books. [Maybe what's hard rather than easy is to recognize that the same actions mean different things and have different values in different hands? :)] -Nora goes to do some more brushing up on virtue ethics, which seems to be the best fit (if any) for JKR From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Sun Jan 8 03:56:04 2006 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Sun, 08 Jan 2006 03:56:04 -0000 Subject: Winky/Bellatrix parallel? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146079 Okay, I admit this sounds crazy, but I'm rereading GoF and I was struck by the following incomplete remark from the butterbeer-saturated Winky: "Master is--*hic*--trusting Winky with--*hic*--the most important-- *hic*--the most secret--" (Am. ed. 537). Compare Bellatrix's unfinished remark to Snape in "Spinner's End" regarding the man, er, whatever he is, that she considers to be *her* master: "The Dark Lord has, in the past, entrusted me with his most precious--" (HBP Am. ed. 29). Winky (who has drunk six bottles of butterbeer) is defending herself from the implication (Hermione's of course) that her duties to Mr. Crouch consisted mostly of house work. We know in hindsight that they consisted primarily of taking care of Barty Jr. (and keeping his existence a secret). Bellatrix (who has had a glass or two of wine, if it matters) is defending herself against Snape's implication (through a question spoken in a voice "delicately inflected to suggest disbelief") that LV no longer trusts her after the fiasco at the MoM. Maybe I'm just obsessed with "Spinner's End," but the similarity of the wording struck me as interesting. Assuming that the wording is deliberately parallel, maybe the point is only the fanatical devotion of a female servant to a merciless and tyrannical master who has more or less discarded her (fired her, in Winky's case; stopped trusting her in Bellatrix's). But neither Bellatrix nor Winky finishes the sentence. We discover near the end of GoF what Winky's secret duty was. I'm almost certain that we'll find out Bellatrix's in Book 7 (I've already suggested that it might be hiding the locket Horcrux.) Does anyone besides me think there might be a deliberate parallel here like the "hatred and revulsion" parallel between Snape and Harry in HBP? I realize that we're dealing with two different books set two years apart and that Winky is a devoted house-elf born into slavery, not a Death Eater who chose to follow a Dark Lord, but the similarity still seems striking. And she did know, probably, why young Barty had been sent to Azkaban, yet she remained loyal both to him and to his unloving father. Thoughts, anybody? Or am I seeing parallelsls where none is intended? Carol, who just realized that her brother-in-law has the same birthday as Severus Snape Carol, trying to talk about something besides Snape From kchuplis at alltel.net Sun Jan 8 03:06:45 2006 From: kchuplis at alltel.net (Karen) Date: Sat, 7 Jan 2006 21:06:45 -0600 Subject: Let's talk about Lupin/SHIP Lupin/Tonks In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146080 > Pippin: > > Let me ask, if I'm right and Lupin was? turned by Voldemort, > forced to kill Sirius and cooperate with The Plan in order to keep > this secret...isn't his behavior in HBP? just what you'd expect? > Distant, stilted, non-committal, staring into the fire, and a sudden > wild outburst of emotion when it all goes wrong *again* (from the > pov of a reluctant DE who was expecting Draco to fail and > Snape to die) and Dumbledore is killed? > > Let's face it., Lupin's behaviour could be explained any number of ways. Myself,I took it as becoming depressed both over his Tonks situation and being separated from everyone at the Order and having to spend a lot of time as a spy. Sure he can do it, but Lupin doesn't strike me as spy material. He DOES strike me as a fabulous teacher. Anyone in a high pressure situation, isolated and in a position that they do not like that is far removed from the "normal" life Lupin has been struggling for his whole life and spending tons of time with people who don't even (as it seems from the books) *try* for is bound to be depressing. Lupin's demeanor, loss of weight and continuing premature graying all point to depression to me. You see? It can mean anything if you spin it the right way. In response to earlier posts about what Lupin thought about Tonks; from the bit of dialogue we got at the end, I got the impression that this had been addressed between the two of them many times ("I've told you a million times..) if Lupin didn't care for Tonks, I don't think that he would have been beyond saying "Tonks I really like you as a friend, but just not in that way". Instead, it sounds like the issues are just as he says, age, economic status (with little hope of that improving thanks to Umbridge) and the fact that he can turn into a raging animal that would attack anyone. There are several references in PoA of how much time he has spent shuddering over what *could* have happened when he was at Hogwarts, both when young and as a teacher. It happened off page, but there didn't seem to be much doubt from the scene we got what their relationship has been like. My guess is too that the difference between Tonks at the end of OoTP and HBP is that Sirius' sudden death was probably the kicker to Tonks to "declare herself" to Lupin. kchuplis From h2so3f at yahoo.com Sun Jan 8 05:24:10 2006 From: h2so3f at yahoo.com (h2so3f) Date: Sun, 08 Jan 2006 05:24:10 -0000 Subject: Bella Placed Locket in the Cave Theory WAS: Potion in the Cave In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146081 CH3ed: I really like Carol's theory that: LV may have told Bella to hide his locket horcrux in the cave (without telling her it was just one of six horcruxes). And Bella, for fear of failure, took Kreacher with her in accomplishing the task. Kreacher then spilled the bean to Regulus/RAB, was forced by Regulus/RAB to help him replace the locket horcrux with a fake by drinking the potion (that resulted in permanently addled brain). Regulus then failed to destroy the locket before he died. It does neatly explain pretty much everything we see. My only problem is with Kreacher surviving that potion while Dumbledore probably wouldn't have (had he not get AKed on the Tower). But then Kreacher is a house-elf... and LV wouldn't have expected any such lowly creature (in his mind) to be able to penetrate all the way to one of his highly protected horcrux... so he might have used a potion that while fatal to wizards, is less so for house-elf? Also I hope that with Bella falling out of LV's favor, LV wouldn't think to check on the cave horcrux to hide it else where just because he no longer trust Bella much (seems like that hadn't occurred to him since the fake locket was still in place at the end of the year when Harry and DD found it, while we know of Bella's disgraced status in the beginning of the year). CH3ed :O) From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Sun Jan 8 05:41:51 2006 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Sun, 08 Jan 2006 05:41:51 -0000 Subject: Snape again/Love and Vengeance/Ending In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146082 Sue wrote: > > Ooh, Snape would HATE that! Think about how long and grudgingly he carried this "life debt" to James because he'd saved him from wolf Lupin, till he could repay it to Harry! > Now, imagine him having another debt and not being able to repay it... No doubt this will please those fans who hate Snape - the adult ones, anyway - but would it be a satisfying conclusion to the series? The major difference in the Narnia tale is that by the time Aslan > sacrifices himself, Edmund has long ago concluded he made a major mistake, that the White Witch is crazy and has to be opposed. If Harry sacrificed himself for Snape, Snape would never, ever forgive him, IMO. :-) Carol responds: Very true, but it won't happen because, as you say, it wouldn't be a satisfying conclusion to the series for anyone, even Snape haters, because the final confrontation has to be between Voldemort and Harry, not an anticlimactic battle between Snape and, say, diehard DEs in which Harry interferes. Harry wouldn't sacrifice his life to save ESE! or OFH!Snape from Aurors, right? So a much more likely outcome (sigh!) is for Snape to sacrifice himself to save Harry. But since that scenario is all too predictable, how about this one, which has actually been foreshadowed in HBP with Snape and Draco: Snape finally pays off his life debt to James by saving Harry from the curse he himself invented, Sectum Sempra? Can you imagine Snape kneeling beside Harry *singing* that complicated countercurse? And Harry would know exactly what it was and realize at last that he and Snape really are on the same side? He would challenge him: "Why did you do that? You murdered Dumbledore!" but he would also give him a chance to have his say because he would really want to know. Carol, who does not find DDM!Snape at all unbelievable and does *not* want Book 7 to be "Harry Potter and the Pursuit of Poetic Justice," aka "The Divine Karmedy" From katmac at katmac.cncdsl.com Sun Jan 8 05:57:23 2006 From: katmac at katmac.cncdsl.com (lagattalucianese) Date: Sun, 08 Jan 2006 05:57:23 -0000 Subject: Snape again/Love and Vengeance/Ending In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146083 > ... > > Carol, who does not find DDM!Snape at all unbelievable and does *not* > want Book 7 to be "Harry Potter and the Pursuit of Poetic Justice," > aka "The Divine Karmedy" > La Gatta Lucianese: Oh, I love it! Frankly, I don't believe Snape will turn out to be ESE!Snape, because it would be such a comedown it would really amount to bad writing. JKR has devoted an enormous amount of time and energy turning Snape into a person we feel sorry for and care about. To shoot her readers down by having Snape turn out to be the consumate villain after all would be just too disappointing. I can see her killing him off, though I profoundly hope she won't; if she does, I think it will be either in battle at Harry's side against Voldemort, or sacrificing himself in some way to make Harry's victory over Voldemort possible. From sherriola at earthlink.net Sun Jan 8 06:05:14 2006 From: sherriola at earthlink.net (Sherry Gomes) Date: Sat, 7 Jan 2006 22:05:14 -0800 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Snape again/Love and Vengeance/Ending In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <00da01c61419$7ecd9ce0$0400a8c0@pensive> No: HPFGUIDX 146084 La Gatta Lucianese: Frankly, I don't believe Snape will turn out to be ESE!Snape, because it would be such a comedown it would really amount to bad writing. JKR has devoted an enormous amount of time and energy turning Snape into a person we feel sorry for and care about. To shoot her readers down by having Snape turn out to be the consumate villain after all would be just too disappointing. I can see her killing him off, though I profoundly hope she won't; if she does, I think it will be either in battle at Harry's side against Voldemort, or sacrificing himself in some way to make Harry's victory over Voldemort possible. Sherry now: But not all readers would be disappointed. Frankly, i have never felt sorry for Snape or cared one wit about him. In fact, there's been far too much page time devoted to him. He's extremely dislikable, mean, a bully and not very interesting. Turning him into a saint, noble and self sacrificing would be bad writing in my opinion. ok, not bad writing, because it's JKR's story, and she's going to go where she wants to go with it. But it would be terribly disappointing and boring to have Harry be all wrong *again* about poor little misunderstood sevvy. Yawn. Snape hasn't done anything that earns my caring or sympathy. The second to last thing I want to see in the last book is Snape nobly sacrificing himself for the sake of Harry. or sacrificing himself to help defeat Voldemort. the only thing i don't want to see even more is Harry dying. i've even been considering waiting to buy the book till i know the outcome, so if it ends up with the noble Severus saving the day, or with the death of Harry, I can save some money. Sherry From katmac at katmac.cncdsl.com Sun Jan 8 06:09:22 2006 From: katmac at katmac.cncdsl.com (lagattalucianese) Date: Sun, 08 Jan 2006 06:09:22 -0000 Subject: Where Did Snape Go? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146085 La Gatta Lucianese: Where did Snape go after he fled from Hogwarts? Could he have at some earlier point swiped McGonagall's time turner in order to whisk himself back to the early 1880s, just in time for a certain doctor, recently returned from Injah, to encounter a tall, lean, dark-haired, beaky individual slouching about his rooms in an old gray dressing gown, excelling at fencing and single-stick (when is a wand not a wand?), conducting arcane chemical experiments, and anaesthetizing himself with work in the name of justice and a 7% solution to silence the demons in his mind? (Gatta has really got to stop smoking Floo Powder...) From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Sun Jan 8 06:35:02 2006 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Sun, 08 Jan 2006 06:35:02 -0000 Subject: Essays about Snape on Lexicon In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146086 Alla wrote: > Did Snape indeed see Peter on the Map? Because if he did, his > behaviour in the Shack indeed goes from insane to malicious to me. IMO of course. Carol responds: Lupin sees Sirius pulling Ron and Pettigrew (in rat form) into the tunnel under the Whomping Willow (PoA Am. ed. 348) and enters it "a few minutes" after Harry and Hermione (404). By that time, Padfoot, moving quickly, has dragged Ron into the Shrieking Shack. (Sirius and the Trio have six pages of dialogue before he arrives at a run.) Snape sees Lupin, and only Lupin, when he's already inside the tunnel: "Lying on your desk was a certain map. One glance at it told me all I needed to know. I saw you running along this passageway *and out of sight*." (PoA Am. ed. 358). So the Shrieking Shack itself is off the map (the tunnel shows up on the map only when it's on Hogwarts grounds, not when it enters Hogsmeade). Sirius, HRH, and Pettigrew were in the Shack and off the map when Snape saw it. So rather than assume malice and insanity, I think it's best to go with canon. Carol From indiasjones at msn.com Sat Jan 7 21:46:57 2006 From: indiasjones at msn.com (india jones) Date: Sat, 07 Jan 2006 21:46:57 -0000 Subject: Comprehensive Horcrux List/Top 10 Horcrux List In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146087 DB wrote: > Can someone please tell me (or let me know where I can find) the > most recent comprehenisive list of what everyone thinks might be > horcruxes...or if that's too much to list, how bout' a Horcrux > Top Ten? Here's a link to wikipedia, they discuss horcruxes--known, maybes, and possible locations. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Horcrux From rdoliver30 at yahoo.com Sun Jan 8 07:36:40 2006 From: rdoliver30 at yahoo.com (lupinlore) Date: Sun, 08 Jan 2006 07:36:40 -0000 Subject: Snape again/Love and Vengeance/Ending In-Reply-To: <00da01c61419$7ecd9ce0$0400a8c0@pensive> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146088 > Sherry wrote: > > But not all readers would be disappointed. Frankly, i have > never felt sorry for Snape or cared one wit about him. In > fact, there's been far too much page time devoted to him. > He's extremely dislikable, mean, a bully and not very > interesting. Turning him into a saint, noble and self > sacrificing would be bad writing in my opinion. I certainly agree with that (even though I know you take it back in the next sentence ). Most DDM!Snape scenarios in effect make Snape the hero of the story. Leaving aside the reprehensible nature of making a hero out of a child abuser (which is, of course, what many of us consider him clearly to be), that has the problem of making the entire series up to this point, including the titles of the books, into a red herring. Now I like red herrings as much as the next person, but that's too fishy for me. There are some scenarios in which I might feel sorry for Snape. However, I don't think I could ever sympathize with such an abominable wretch. And certainly I can see no scenario in which he can be released from punishment for his abuse of Harry and Neville. > But it would be terribly disappointing and boring to have > Harry be all wrong *again* about poor little misunderstood > sevvy. Yawn. Oh, absolutely. That is the other thing that falls apart in most "pure" DDM!Scenarios (distinguishing them from Grey!Snape and LID!Snape scenarios, which can have many of the same features). Many people claim that anything other than DDM! makes Dumbledore into a fool. But most DDM! scenarios make HARRY into a fool, which is, IMO, much, much worse. > The second to last thing I want to see in the last book is > Snape nobly sacrificing himself for the sake of Harry. or > sacrificing himself to help defeat Voldemort. Well, it's hard to see Sevvie being noble about anything. I can see scenarios where he would act this way, but only for reasons that would be -- at the very least -- decidedly mixed. Lupinlore, who very much does look forward to reading The Divine Karmedy, or I Was Supposed to Be DDM! and all I got was this Lousy Comeuppance. From coverton at netscape.com Sun Jan 8 06:27:15 2006 From: coverton at netscape.com (corey_over) Date: Sun, 08 Jan 2006 06:27:15 -0000 Subject: Where Did Snape Go? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146089 La Gatta Lucianese: > Could he have at some earlier point swiped McGonagall's time turner in > order to whisk himself back to the early 1880s, just in time for a > certain doctor, recently returned from Injah, to encounter a tall, > lean, dark-haired, beaky individual slouching about his rooms in an > old gray dressing gown, excelling at fencing and single-stick (when is > a wand not a wand?), conducting arcane chemical experiments, and > anaesthetizing himself with work in the name of justice and a 7% > solution to silence the demons in his mind? Corey here. It's been a few days. But who is this that you speak of? Just wondering. As far as Snape went, I think he and Draco went off either to hide from Voldemort or to join him. Take your pick as to which. Your fellow member, Corey ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Your friendly neighborhood List Elf reminds: Please remember to articulate how your response(s) in this thread relates to our discussions here of canon - thanks! From mudblood68 at yahoo.de Sun Jan 8 08:56:59 2006 From: mudblood68 at yahoo.de (Claudia) Date: Sun, 08 Jan 2006 08:56:59 -0000 Subject: Last minute points / JKR's view of it (was:Re: Special treatment - yes or no) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146090 Betsy Hp: > Was this Dumbledore's intended outcome? I really, really doubt it. > As I said before, Dumbledore is incredibly weak at recognizing and > dealing with rivalry. He fails at it again and again. So I'm quite > sure he was concentrating on his pride and love for Harry and giving > little to no thought on the dignity of Slytherin. Which is why the > Sorting Hat tells us that there's been little to no process in the > uniting of the Houses, even under the leadership of Dumbledore. Claudia here: Two thoughts on this issue: First: I really, really like your thought about DD's weakness in dealing with rivalry. Yes, indeed, it explains a lot, e.g. also his troubles with Fudge/ the Ministry. Second: My big problem with the Leaving Feast and the way of point- rewarding is, that DD is a Gryffindor himself (yes, I remember the discussion if this is really canon, but according to Hermione's statement the kids believe that he is). So in my POV he ought to be especially careful how he handles such matters to avoid favouritism. Someone has quoted already Ron's statement at the beginning of PS/SS about Snape favouring his own house and I think it's Fred who says, he wished McGonagall would do the same for her house. Well, in fact she does (the broomstick incident) and so does DD. Claudia From montavilla47 at yahoo.com Sun Jan 8 09:04:15 2006 From: montavilla47 at yahoo.com (montavilla47) Date: Sun, 08 Jan 2006 09:04:15 -0000 Subject: Let's talk about Lupin/SHIP Lupin/Tonks In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146091 kchuplis: > My guess is too that the difference > between Tonks at the end of OoTP and HBP is that Sirius' sudden death > was probably the kicker to Tonks to "declare herself" to Lupin. Montavilla: Just to add to this: Tonks was also dealing with having gone through her first big fight (at the MoM) as an auror and having been seriously injured. I imagine that might have shaken Lupin up as well. We're also viewing Tonks and Lupin through Harry's PoV in these books--which limits how much we're ever going to see of the relationship. I'll confess I didn't catch any hint of Lupin/Tonks in OotP. I didn't see the hospital scene coming, but I didn't find it horribly out of character. On the whole, I was glad to see Tonks finally do something to justify having her in the books at all. Throughout OotP, she just seemed to be a collection of odd character traits (clumsy, good at making faces, says "Wotcher" all the time) in search of a storyline. From zarleycat at sbcglobal.net Sun Jan 8 12:30:35 2006 From: zarleycat at sbcglobal.net (kiricat4001) Date: Sun, 08 Jan 2006 12:30:35 -0000 Subject: Let's talk about Lupin In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146092 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "pippin_999" wrote: > > > > > > Marianne: > > > > All well and good, but from my perspective as a reader, I have not > > seen any indication of *Lupin's* feelings. Yes, we see early and > > often that Tonks is laboring under some sort of problem. But we see > > nothing of Lupin that suggests, IMO, that he's ever returned Tonks's > > feelings. He's pensive by the fireside at Christmas, but that's > > when he seems most oddly un-Lupin-like to me. All we seen from him > > directly with regards to his own feelings towards Tonks, and from > > his own mouth, is that he's tried to push her away. > > > > You may very well be right in all of your comments. But, to me, the > > case for a couple in love is lacking from the behavior and words of > > one half of the couple, which gets back to lindsay's original > > comments of this not being one of those pairings that's been > > foreshadowed. > > Pippin: > > Let me ask, if I'm right and Lupin was turned by Voldemort, > forced to kill Sirius and cooperate with The Plan in order to keep > this secret...isn't his behavior in HBP just what you'd expect? > Distant, stilted, non-committal, staring into the fire, and a sudden > wild outburst of emotion when it all goes wrong *again* (from the > pov of a reluctant DE who was expecting Draco to fail and > Snape to die) and Dumbledore is killed? Marianne: <> I suppose I could buy that, although if it turns out that you're right, I'll be sorely disappointed. However, a tip of the hat to you for sticking to your ESE!Lupin theory. My question, though, is why would Lupin need to know about the plan to kill DD and who would have told him about the Unbreakable Vow? Or would he have only known about the plan at the moment it was unfolding to its end on the Tower? If he knew well in advance of the plan, he might very well expect Draco to fail, but he wouldn't necessarily know anything about the possibility of Snape dying as a result of the UV. Another big hesitation I have with ESE!Lupin is I forget why he would have turned to Vmort in the first place. Surely Lupin doesn't believe that he, a tainted dark creature, will be given the same rights as pure-bloods once the DEs are in power. Am I missing some other reason? Marianne From mgrantwich at yahoo.com Sun Jan 8 12:50:25 2006 From: mgrantwich at yahoo.com (Magda Grantwich) Date: Sun, 8 Jan 2006 04:50:25 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Let's talk about Lupin In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20060108125025.63179.qmail@web53110.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 146093 --- lindseyharrisst wrote: > What does the group think of the Lupin shipping in HBP? I > contend that it is... > a. not foreshadowed or calculable, even in retrospect, > contrary to most things in the books, esp. shipping True, but since 98% of what we see takes place when Harry is in the room, it's not surprising that we're not aware of what the adults are up to. And Harry's not the most observant of people when he is in the room. > b. because it is a narrative afterthought it was not well > thought out, what good could Lupin and Tonks see in each other > (over being with someone else, or alone)? I'm sure Tonks is a fine, wonderful young woman who would make any wizard a great lifetime companion, so that would explain what Lupin (or anyone) would see in her. Lupin has that gentle quality that a lot of women are attracted to - it gives men an air of being sensitive, of reading poetry and then staring pensively into the firelight. (And he knows what it's like to have his "monthlies" and can be empathetic when appropriate. Paradise.) > c. does it seem in chracter for Lupin to fall in love (and with > Tonks)? No, it doesn't seem in character for Lupin to fall in love because during his explanation scene in POA he seems to regard even being friends with him as some horrible fate for James, Sirius and Peter as teenagers. Lupin has too many issues over his condition to ever let his emotions go enough to fall in love. > d. Do you think it's authentic love on his or her part? There's a "let's match these two up!" haphazard quality to this ship that struck as decidedly off. Lupin's attempted rejection of Tonks seemed like the act of a man desperately avoiding a trap and that seemed much more realistic to me. And I didn't like the way Tonks went all passive and mopey over her love during the book. When she popped up in the third floor corridor in front of Harry, I thought it was Poly-juiced Draco. I still find it bizarre that it was really her. > who thinks JK now has more shipping than P&O, and it's not a > good thing) It's not the shipping I mind but rather the quality of the cargo. Ron turned into a total doofus, Hermoine into a shrew, Harry's roaring monster gave me the giggles and Ginny unleashed her inner bitch. Not sure it made young love look very attractive. Personally I think that if JKR has any ambitions to be a romance writer, a sympathetic but firm editor needs to sit her down for a long chat. Magda __________________________________________ Yahoo! DSL Something to write home about. Just $16.99/mo. or less. dsl.yahoo.com From zarleycat at sbcglobal.net Sun Jan 8 13:00:52 2006 From: zarleycat at sbcglobal.net (kiricat4001) Date: Sun, 08 Jan 2006 13:00:52 -0000 Subject: Let's talk about Lupin In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146094 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Jen Reese" wrote: Lupin seemed off to me too, or rather, his negative traits of > passivity and not wanting to take a stand seemed exaggerated. His > situation reminded me a little too much of Sirius at Grimmauld. > Lupin's mission forced him to temporarily leave behind a life which > was somewhat happier and certainly offered more freedom. Being > trapped in the werewolf subculture with mostly hostile companions > was having a life-draining effect on him just as Grimmauld did for > Sirius. It made me nervous that JKR was writing him into a corner > just as she did with Sirius, where the only real option was death. > But then after the tower sequence and the Lupin/Tonks reveal, it > seemed more likely Snape was probabaly the one being set up for the > death sequence, the one being stripped of options other than death. Marianne: Well, given a choice for who to bump off, Remus or Snape, I'd happily vote for Snape ;-). > Marianne: > > But, to get to the Tonks thing, I agree, I felt it came out of > > left field. It felt tacked on to me, as if JKR suddenly decided > > not only to pair these two off, but to use this as another facet > > of the theme of obsessive love, but an obsessive love that turns > > out okay. > > Jen: I couldn't decide, either, until the hand-holding and bubblegum > pink hair at the funeral. Is it possible one Marauder will get to > live happily ever after?!? I figured that scene was a 'case- closed' > moment and unless one dies, they will be a couple. Marianne: It probably is meant as a signal that all is right with R/N, but it still feels unsatisfactory to me. It's funny though - people have posted that one reason that we see no obvious interaction foreshadowing this pairing is that we see things through Harry's eyes. Granted that means that we don't see a lot of whatever might have happened between these two because it doesn't take place in Harry's presence. Yet, even when they have been together there has not been evidence to me (thinking OoP) that there was an attraction. And here in HBP Harry *thinks* that they might be holding hands, and, of course, everyone assumes he must be right. > Marianne: > > The denoument of Tonks' problem as it was revealed in the Hospital > > scene was as jarring to me as someone suddenly dropping an armload > > of pots and pans on the floor. Now, maybe we're supposed to > > read this as Tonks desperately making a final, heartfelt plea to > > Remus to make his see she truly loves him. My reaction to her > > was "What part of "no" don't you understand?" > > Jen: Haha! That's good. I actually liked that scene, figured with so > much heartache going on and the inevitability of Order members being > targeted after Dumbledore's death, Tonks was spurred on to make one > last desperate plea. And without that scene, one of my all-time > favorite poignant moments would be lost: 'But she wants you,' said > Mr. Weasley with a small smile. 'And after all, Remus, young and > whole men do not necessarily remain so.' He gestured sadly at his > son, lying between them. Marianne: I'm going to come off as completely unfeeling here. But, that line, while very understanding of Arthur with regards to Bill and to Fleur's evidently undiminished love for her man, is a bit condescending to Remus. After all, Remus spent a good part of the previous year living in Grimmauld Place with a friend, Sirius, who had once been very handsome and who was now anything but handsome and whole. I think Remus was already well aware of what can happen to young men when caught up in a war. > Jen: Obsession was a major theme for more than just romantic > pairings. Harry was certainly obsessed with Draco and I believe > Dumbledore had an obsessive air about him with the horcrux hunt that > could have further implications for the story. > > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/146041 > > kchulpis writes in the post above about the healthy love going on, > and that perhaps the shipping has a deeper meaning connected to the > love theme than simply being light romance to break up the story. > Tonks and Lupin appeared more on par with Ginny/Harry and > Ron/Hermione to me, as couples with barriers to overcome before > getting together. Marianne: Maybe it does. But, does that mean the love theme requires all unattached people to become attached to someone before the series ends? Maybe the barometer for whether or not characters are killed off shouldn't be based on if their birthdays are celebrated on JKR's website. Maybe the real key is that, if you're an adult, and you're not paired off, you're dead. Doesn't look good for Snape or Peter, does it? ;-) I'm undoubtedly making too much of this. I accept everyone's counter opinions that Remus and Tonks are a real couple, are really in love, etc. But my reactions are colored by the way the scene felt when I first read it, and it didn't come off to me as a particularly convincing. Marianne, way too cynical for her own good. From lolita_ns at yahoo.com Sun Jan 8 13:12:29 2006 From: lolita_ns at yahoo.com (lolita_ns) Date: Sun, 08 Jan 2006 13:12:29 -0000 Subject: Where Did Snape Go? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146095 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "lagattalucianese" wrote: > > La Gatta Lucianese: > > Where did Snape go after he fled from Hogwarts? > > Could he have at some earlier point swiped McGonagall's time turner in > order to whisk himself back to the early 1880s, just in time for a > certain doctor, recently returned from Injah, to encounter a tall, > lean, dark-haired, beaky individual slouching about his rooms in an > old gray dressing gown, excelling at fencing and single-stick (when is > a wand not a wand?), conducting arcane chemical experiments, and > anaesthetizing himself with work in the name of justice and a 7% > solution to silence the demons in his mind? > > (Gatta has really got to stop smoking Floo Powder...) Lolita: I agree with you - you have got to stop smoking suspicious substances :) But I have a feeling that you yourself do not really believe in this ;) - other things notwithstanding, from a practical, i.e. legal, point of view, how would Rowling share her royalties with Doyle? Admittedly, the 1909. copyright law would not affect *him*... but still, you can't have your characters metamorph into another writer's characters and still claim them to be fully yours... Hmmm... While I am at it, a nice touch for this absolutely cuckoo theory would be the Not Really Dead and Employing a Time Turner to Jump Back a Century and Impersonate Maicroft Holmes!Regulus Black. Really plausible, eh? Besides, is there any canon evidence as to McGonagall having a Time Turner? Just out of curiosity, of course... Anyway, enjoy those silly cigarettes for me too, will you? :)) Lolita From lorelei3dg at yahoo.com Sun Jan 8 13:23:35 2006 From: lorelei3dg at yahoo.com (lorelei3dg) Date: Sun, 08 Jan 2006 13:23:35 -0000 Subject: Special treatment of Harry or not WAS:Re: Lessons in the book In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146096 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Ceridwen" wrote: > Ceridwen: > My gripe is with the rule-breaking in ordinary incidents. Such as > talking in class, and wandering around after hours (with or without > cloak), sneaking into Hogsmeade despite warnings for his life in PoA > and suchlike. I > don't think Harry should get a pass for ordinary infractions just > because he's The Boy Who Lived. That, and the various mysteries he > solves in the books, doesn't mean he can carry on a conversation with > Ron in class, for one instance. His studies are important for him to > progress to the point where he can defeat Voldemort. And the > sneaking into Hogsmeade was forbidden to him for the very point that > his life was supposedly in danger. > > My other gripe is the cavalier attitude toward detention. Instead of > being ashamed that they broke the rules (in an ordinary manner), > they're offended that they are being disciplined. The hero, his best > friends, and the narration, all seem to say that detention is no big > deal, it's quite all right to have it, it proves your goodness > instead of proving that you were doing less than you could have done > to make the most of school. > > I do happen to think that the kids seem to consider themselves above > the rules ordinary students have to follow, in these examples. >Ceridwen. Speaking as a teacher(7 years high school, 5 years middle school), this has become completely normal behavior for almost all students: nearly everyone carries on conversations in class at some point and to some extent, and those who are reprimanded or sent out of the room to reflect on how their behavior impacted the class respond with incredulous cries of "I wasn't doing anything!" They don't seem to have the maturity to value that moment in class or understand its impact on their future. After all, it was only for a moment, you know. As far as detentions go, at least in the middle school where I currently teach, detention is the most-used consequence by far. As such, it's so common that there is no longer any shame attached to it. There is still the occasional student who becomes quite upset at receiving a punishment, but for the most part it means nothing to them. While these responses from students does make me worry about the future of education (if not our populace in general!), they are universal enough that I would have been suspicious of a Harry who paid careful attention all the time and showed remorse after every infraction or detention, and I think he would have become a less believable character for young readers as well. Lorel From foxmoth at qnet.com Sun Jan 8 13:50:39 2006 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Sun, 08 Jan 2006 13:50:39 -0000 Subject: Winky/Bellatrix parallel? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146097 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "justcarol67" wrote: > > Okay, I admit this sounds crazy, but I'm rereading GoF and I was > struck by the following incomplete remark from the > butterbeer-saturated Winky: > > "Master is--*hic*--trusting Winky with--*hic*--the most important-- > *hic*--the most secret--" (Am. ed. 537). > > Compare Bellatrix's unfinished remark to Snape in "Spinner's End" > regarding the man, er, whatever he is, that she considers to be *her* > master: > > "The Dark Lord has, in the past, entrusted me with his most > precious--" (HBP Am. ed. 29). > > Maybe I'm just obsessed with "Spinner's End," but the similarity of > the wording struck me as interesting. Assuming that the wording is > deliberately parallel, maybe the point is only the fanatical devotion > of a female servant to a merciless and tyrannical master who has more > or less discarded her (fired her, in Winky's case; stopped trusting > her in Bellatrix's). But neither Bellatrix nor Winky finishes the > sentence. We discover near the end of GoF what Winky's secret duty > was. I'm almost certain that we'll find out Bellatrix's in Book 7 > (I've already suggested that it might be hiding the locket Horcrux.) > > Does anyone besides me think there might be a deliberate parallel here > like the "hatred and revulsion" parallel between Snape and Harry in > HBP Pippin: Yes, I think you're on to something. The sense of intimacy created by shared secrets seems to be confused with love. There's also a hint of this between Myrtle and Draco. Maybe I'm just obsessed with EverSoEvil!Lupin, but this parallel would help my theory that Sirius was killed because his knowledge of the prophecy, revealed when he shouted to Harry in the DoM, had come from a traitor in the Order rather than from Dumbledore. Dumbledore is adamant that he and he alone could have told Harry that there was no need for him to go to the Department of Mysteries, which strongly suggests that Sirius was not supposed to know anything specific. I'd been wondering why a traitor would tell Sirius in the first place. Sharing a secret about Harry might have been a way for the traitor to assure himself that any doubts Sirius might have would be quieted. Pippin who thinks JKR tipped her hat to the fans of so-called "weird pairings" when she had Harry think that Draco and Myrtle were an "unlikely coupling" From ceridwennight at hotmail.com Sun Jan 8 16:02:36 2006 From: ceridwennight at hotmail.com (Ceridwen) Date: Sun, 08 Jan 2006 16:02:36 -0000 Subject: Special treatment of Harry or not WAS:Re: Lessons in the book In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146098 Ceridwen: Responding jointly to Hickengruendler and kchuplis. Hickengruendler: > > While it's undoubtly true that they are doing this, isn't this > something totally normal for teenagers? I personally am glad that the > protagonists (not counting the characters that are written as > caricatures on purpose) despite being a bit stereotyped are also very > normal and recognizable persons instead of some saints, who can do no > wrong. Ceridwen: I wouldn't say that all teens who don't talk in class are saints who can do no wrong. They just have a better handle on when to talk and when to listen. And that probably comes through being taught over and over again, by parents, by friends, by earlier teachers, and by the stigma of having detention or fear of same, which is also taught instead of inbred. I can't see that all, or even most, teens talk in class. A class with all or most of the students talking to each other would result in a bunch of dummies. Normal, recognizable teens aren't always talking in class. The ones who don't talk aren't a minority bunch of Percys. Hickengruendler: > And normally, when they are talking in class they do get > points drawn. I really don't think something harmless like that needs > to be punished with a detention, unless the student doesn't shut up > during the whole lessons despite being told to do so. But I can't > remember any scene in the books where a student did this. Ceridwen: They get points drawn, but they don't seem to care about that, either. It's the teacher's fault for not realizing how important their discussion really is. Which does seem to fit what some teens, who do regularily talk in class, seem to think. And, that's my gripe. The narrative enforces this as normal behavior. Didn't Ron ask why they needed to listen to Snape in Potions? I like Ron, but that was just... well, it negatively amazed me. And, detention in RL would probably also be given if the student talks in class, and has to be told to stop, day after day. A constant disruption doesn't have to be done in a single class. Hickengruendler: > And whenever Harry is getting caught sneaking around he does get > punished, with three exceptions. Ceridwen: But, he is caught sneaking around time after time which has no bearing on the particular mission of the book. He gets punished, but he's right back doing it again. It doesn't work. There is no stigma. It's almost a badge of rebellion to have detention. The fact that he keeps on doing it over and over (as do other students, apparently, but we don't see them consistently the way we do Harry) means that there is no effectiveness in detention. *(snipping examples)* Hickengruendler: > > This is not entirely true. Harry and Hermione agreed, for example, > that they did deserve the Detention in PS given by McGonagall. And > like I said, those are teenagers and I find this pretty normal. The > authorial voice is also a pretty tricky one, because most of the time > (though not always) the authorial voice only presents us Harry's > thoughts. Therefore it is a pretty biased one, and we recognize this > all the times, where Harry has to recognize, that he has judged some > people wrongly or without knowing the whole story. Ceridwen: Yes, the authorial voice is usually in Harry's POV. And it's this POV which bothers me, as I said. Agreeing that detention was merited isn't the same thing as being ashamed that detention was merited, or agreeing to try and not be in that same position again. Not just not getting caught in that position, but not being in that position to begin with. This is Harry's story. He's supposed to be growing up, learning not only school lessons, but life lessons, too. And so far, he doesn't seem to be learning that punishment is meant for instruction, not for derision. kchuplis: > I don't know about the proving your goodness part, but in general the attitude toward > detentions seems rather normal to me. Kids, no matter what, will feel 'hard done by' > when punished, even if they know they have done wrong. (Somehow I find this > perhaps the bud of adults where "it isn't MY fault" syndrome has bloomed into an > entire litigious society who sue everyone for everything, but that's a different debate). Ceridwen: Exactly. Kids who think they should have gotten away with things do tend to grow up whiney and litigious. Which isn't what I would like to see for the hero of our story. Sure, we've all felt wrongly done by in punishment. But at the same time, we resolve, at the very least, not to get caught again. In cases where the punishment is grudgingly agreed to be merited, we resolve not to place ourselves in that position, not only not get caught. I don't see resolve to become a better person in the narrative. I see a resolve not to get caught, which the Marauder's Map helps. In cases where there is a genuine need for the hero to be the hero, that's fine. Someone used a speeding analogy - even when speeding to the hospital with someone bleeding uncontrollably in the back seat, the driver can't afford to be stopped even for the couple of minutes it will take the cop to check the license plate, inform his or her superiors that there has been a stop, and whatever else it is that takes so long before they get out of the car to discover the emergency. Best to go the speed limit, and not be stopped at all. kchuplis: > What I found to be the most egregious case of "special treatment" in six books and > treated *definitely* with a completely misplaced "hard done by" attitude, was Harry's > detention in HBP for using the sectumsempra curse on Malfoy. Yes, Harry is certainly > horrified, and definitely sorry; he listens to Snape with NO thought of leaving and > waits 10 minutes for him to return and punish Harry. However, this is one incident in > which our hero absolutely lies, deliberately hides evidence (as it were) and then dares > to complain about the first detention being during the big match. Quite honestly, > such a ghastly incident seemed to call for more than Saturday detentions the rest of > the year. Granted he didn't *know* what the curse would do and Malfoy *was* about > to use an unforgiveable curse, but there is only Harry's word for that. So it seems > even in this case and with the dreaded Snape as the judge, Harry gets off awfully light > in my opinion. Ceridwen: But would Harry have reacted to this particular detention in the same way if he hadn't reacted the same way to past detentions? His own concerns are all that matters once the incident is over with. There is no grudging admission that the detention is deserved, it clearly isn't deserved to him since it cuts into the Quidditch game, and later into time with Ginny. Someone else said that this was his reaction to Snape, but in the beginning, it wasn't. And how could he forget the horror of Draco Malfoy open on the floor and gushing blood, so quickly? Even with Snape as a catalyst? For Dumbledore's first lesson, Harry is ecstatic that Snape will not get him for detention that same night. He even gleefully imagines Snape's disappointment. Lessons with Dumbledore are important. So, I'm not too worried about that particular detention missed (it was made up later, IIRC). The reaction to being able to righteously avoid that first detention due to lessons disturbs me, though I can certainly understand Harry's glee. But I think Harry's equal regard for the Quidditch match and a very veiled implication that of course Snape won't let him off for that one day because of house points and the cup at the end of the year, is on another level altogether. Lessons with Dumbledore are not equal to Quidditch, they're worlds more important. House points are not important in the fight against Voldemort. *Learning not to use* spells you know nothing about before you know what they do, is more important than a Quidditch match. And I think that's where this detention was going, rather than the effects of the spell Harry used. Because I can see cutting slack for his not knowing, but not for his using even though he did not know. (Aside: Is this an echo of the UV?) kchuplis: > It is maybe my one big disappointment in JKR's handling of character. To be quite > honest it doesn't fit Harry's past behaviour, especially given how horrified he really > does seem (rightfully so) with the type of curse he just used (yes, unknowingly) that > he would even hesitate to just submit quietly to Snape's judgement. After all, he fully > expected to be thrown in Azkaban for blowing up Aunt Marge and this was certainly > worse than that, really. I think Harry would have shut up and been thankful that this > was all that happened. Instead he even says he disagrees with the punishment. This > scene is the one people should be most up in arms about in regard to special > treatment and I'm very surprised no one's mentioned it. Ceridwen: I agree that it's disappointing that JKR doesn't seem, at this point, to regard detention as anything more than a nuisance. I think, though, that it shows Harry has become more jaded over the years about the things he does that hurt other people. It's another thing he'll have to get over before his meeting with Voldemort. A jaded attitude, even though it's still only developing, is counter to the love that is supposed to be Harry's greatest weapon. I was pleased that he was horrified over what he accidentally did. He was far too loose with his slashing, too. If he'd just flicked his wand, he would probably not have inflicted such major injuries, IMO. Hopefully, he learned the lesson of not overreacting in a tense situation, something he *will* need later on. That he did submit without question to Snape's instructions was a hopeful sign, I think. He was indeed appalled at what he had done. It's only later, when the shock and horror wear off, that he slips back into his more selfish mode of detention being a nuisance. Not that his friends helped him to keep humble about it, they excused him and moved on to the 'really important' things. But, his later disagreeing with the detention is merely a continuation of the same attitude he's had all through the books regarding detention and other punishments. The actual, gorey facts of what he did to Draco were just a minor eddy in the stream of feeling... privileged? (not the best word, but the only one I can come up with right now) enough to get out of detention because *he's* the captain of the Quidditch team, or because he has an amazing new girlfriend who is already a scarce commodity to him due to her studying for her O.W.L.s. (Jealous? of the time he must spend away from his fun activities? Oh, something!) Ceridwen. Don't you hate it when the perfect word escapes? From sherriola at earthlink.net Sun Jan 8 16:27:22 2006 From: sherriola at earthlink.net (Sherry Gomes) Date: Sun, 8 Jan 2006 08:27:22 -0800 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Special treatment of Harry or not WAS:Re: Lessons in the book In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <003801c61470$682844c0$0400a8c0@pensive> No: HPFGUIDX 146099 Ceridwen: I was pleased that he was horrified over what he accidentally did. That he did submit without question to Snape's instructions was a hopeful sign, I think. He was indeed appalled at what he had done. It's only later, when the shock and horror wear off, that he slips back into his more selfish mode of detention being a nuisance. Not that his friends helped him to keep humble about it, they excused him and moved on to the 'really important' things. But, his later disagreeing with the detention is merely a continuation of the same attitude he's had all through the books regarding detention and other punishments. Sherry now: i agree that Harry doesn't give a rip much about detention, and I also agree that it is a pretty common feeling among kids. i think especially if it comes from someone you dislike or disrespect. He was far more affected by a few well chosen words from Lupin in POA, than he'd ever be by detention from Snape. But I think there's something more in this last detention. how could Harry have anything but contempt for a detention designed to try to give him a bad impression of his father and godfather? my dad was so very far from perfect, and my siblings and I can admit it and laugh about it. however, we don't allow outsiders to discuss him that way. i would highly resent a detention that had me having to read letters from all my dad's ex-wives for instance. it would make me completely close off my feelings or thoughts about the reason I was getting the detention or the rightness and wrongness of it. now, I was a kid who was pretty much a rule follower, because i didn't have the opportunity to get into much trouble at Harry's age. And I didn't want my dad to yell at me, because I wanted his approval so much. But Harry doesn't have anyone like that anymore. i don't think he is jaded or unaware of right and wrong. Neither do I think he has an indifferent attitude to right and wrong, just to detention, which is completely different. ever seen the movie, THE BREAKFAST CLUB? The kids in that movie, had a rather indifferent attitude to detention too! overall, i think Harry's attitude, especially in the last detention is pretty understandable because of the situation and the one giving the detention. it doesn't necessarily mean that he doesn't care about the horrible thing he did to get the detention, only that he has no respect for the person giving it. any time Snape punishes Harry, we're going to have that attitude. Thankfully, we won't have any more of it in the last book. Sherry From fuzz876i at yahoo.com Sun Jan 8 16:19:12 2006 From: fuzz876i at yahoo.com (fuzz876i) Date: Sun, 08 Jan 2006 16:19:12 -0000 Subject: special treatment of harry or not/ Draco's special treatment Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146100 Everyone keeps discussing the special treatment of Harry. What about the special treatment of Draco after the hippogriff attack in POA he walks into class and all Snape says is to settle down if that had been Harry or Ron they sure would have been in detention. When they were caught at Hagrid's in PS\SS by Malfoy all that were involved were given detention. Malfoy even protested this because he thought his actions were honorable. He was then told by Mcgonagal that he would serve detention with his classmates. Yes it is true that Harry is the boy who lived or after OOP the Chosen one but as Dumbledore said he rose to the challenges of an adult wizard much sooner than expected and for this he is to be praised. Fuzz From ceridwennight at hotmail.com Sun Jan 8 17:08:14 2006 From: ceridwennight at hotmail.com (Ceridwen) Date: Sun, 08 Jan 2006 17:08:14 -0000 Subject: Special treatment of Harry or not WAS:Re: Lessons in the book In-Reply-To: <003801c61470$682844c0$0400a8c0@pensive> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146101 Sherry now: > i agree that Harry doesn't give a rip much about detention, and I also agree > that it is a pretty common feeling among kids. i think especially if it > comes from someone you dislike or disrespect. He was far more affected by a > few well chosen words from Lupin in POA, than he'd ever be by detention from > Snape. But I think there's something more in this last detention. how > could Harry have anything but contempt for a detention designed to try to > give him a bad impression of his father and godfather? my dad was so very > far from perfect, and my siblings and I can admit it and laugh about it. > however, we don't allow outsiders to discuss him that way. i would highly > resent a detention that had me having to read letters from all my dad's > ex-wives for instance. it would make me completely close off my feelings or > thoughts about the reason I was getting the detention or the rightness and > wrongness of it. Ceridwen: Since I'm leaning toward the idea that the detention was given because Harry acted without thinking or knowing what the outcome might even possibly be, the detention makes sense: recopy the cards of other people's infractions. It probably made a greater impact when he saw that it was mainly Sirius and James who kept showing up in the cards. They weren't the only two, from what I recall offhand. But they were in there an inordinate amount of times. And, how many detentions and other punishments were caused by people acting first and thinking later? Not just James and Sirius, but everyone in the cards. Which is what Harry did - he used a spell he had no knowledge of, and there was a potential disaster. Act first, think last. That Snape assigned a box that he knew would contain more of Harry's father and godfather was just pure Snape. And I've already mentioned that, from what we've been shown so far, Snape seems to have pinpointed himself on the Marauders and hasn't really gone beyond that point. That may just be the 'Harry POV' again, but that's all we have. Sherry: > now, I was a kid who was pretty much a rule follower, > because i didn't have the opportunity to get into much trouble at Harry's > age. And I didn't want my dad to yell at me, because I wanted his approval > so much. But Harry doesn't have anyone like that anymore. i don't think he > is jaded or unaware of right and wrong. Neither do I think he has an > indifferent attitude to right and wrong, just to detention, which is > completely different. Ceridwen: I was the same way about my dad, and my mom as well. But for my mom, it was not wanting her endless lectures. And I do realize that the Dursleys would not have provided the desire, and probably not even the instruction, that someone else might have, to avoid detentions. They probably acted like such a thing would only be expected (St. Somebodyorother's school for incorrigible boys?). But, kchuplis brought up two scenarios: Blowing up Aunt Marge, and slashing Draco. His reaction to the Aunt Marge episode, though not as horrible as the Draco episode, got more worry out of him than slashing Draco so that the bathroom was awash in blood. That's disturbing. Aunt Marge floats away, the Ministry rearranges memories, Harry's given a slap on the wrist and not kicked out of the WW, Aunt Marge is fine if lacking a memory (unfortunately, the WW didn't see fit to give her a personality change as well!), and that *seems* to carry more weight than buckets of blood? Yes, I would say he is becoming jaded. To mishaps, to detention, to what he can get away with. And I think that will be another thing, along with his capacity for hate, which he'll have to release, probably very early in book 7, in order for the love power he has to be able to vanquish the Dark Lord. > ever seen the movie, THE BREAKFAST CLUB? The kids in > that movie, had a rather indifferent attitude to detention too! > overall, i think Harry's attitude, especially in the last detention is > pretty understandable because of the situation and the one giving the > detention. it doesn't necessarily mean that he doesn't care about the > horrible thing he did to get the detention, only that he has no respect for > the person giving it. any time Snape punishes Harry, we're going to have > that attitude. Thankfully, we won't have any more of it in the last book. Ceridwen: I think that the person giving the detention shouldn't matter if he was as caring over the horrible thing he did. But, that opinion aside, we don't see him complain about detention merely because he has it with Snape. He complains about it, period. It cut into his Quidditch. It later cut into his time with Ginny. We do see Harry's thoughts quite often through the books, since he's the POV character. And, we don't see that he only resents the detentions because they're given and managed by Snape. He resents them because they eat up his Saturdays. (Oh, and no, I haven't seen The Breakfast Club. Is it any good?) Ceridwen. From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Sun Jan 8 17:21:47 2006 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Sun, 08 Jan 2006 17:21:47 -0000 Subject: Did Snape see Peter on the Map or not? WAS: Re: Essays about Snape on Lexicon In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146102 > Alla wrote: > > > > Did Snape indeed see Peter on the Map? Because if he did, his > > behaviour in the Shack indeed goes from insane to malicious to me. > IMO of course. > > Carol responds: > > Lupin sees Sirius pulling Ron and Pettigrew (in rat form) into the > tunnel under the Whomping Willow (PoA Am. ed. 348) and enters it "a > few minutes" after Harry and Hermione (404). By that time, Padfoot, > moving quickly, has dragged Ron into the Shrieking Shack. (Sirius and > the Trio have six pages of dialogue before he arrives at a run.) > > Snape sees Lupin, and only Lupin, when he's already inside the tunnel: > > "Lying on your desk was a certain map. One glance at it told me all I > needed to know. I saw you running along this passageway *and out of > sight*." (PoA Am. ed. 358). So the Shrieking Shack itself is off the > map (the tunnel shows up on the map only when it's on Hogwarts > grounds, not when it enters Hogsmeade). Sirius, HRH, and Pettigrew > were in the Shack and off the map when Snape saw it. > > So rather than assume malice and insanity, I think it's best to go > with canon. Alla: Thank you for the quote, BUT I did NOT assume insanity - THAT was and till the final book comes out my most favorable interpretation of how Snape behaved in the Shack towards Sirius and Remus. Others interpretations are not that charitable. That is of course just an intepretation, but I absolutely do NOT see Snape behaving in Shack as a sane person, that is if he is a good guy and did not know about Sirius being innocent. IMO of course. "KEEP QUIET, YOU STUPID GIRL!" Snape shouted , looking suddenly quite deranged. " DON"T TALK ABOUT WHAT YOU DON"T UNDERSTAND!" A few sparks shout out of the end of his wand, which was still pointd at Black's face. Hermione fell silent" - PoA, p.360. paperback. To me that is NOT how sane person behaves. Everybody was behaving not quite sane there of course. Again, all of that is only valid to me if Snape indeed did not know about Peter which I doubt more and more, because if he did - he was committing a very bad act, the act which only a person of great malice could commit IMO. As to whom Snape saw on the map, that is why I asked the question - I was not sure that the author of the Essay was correct on that point and if we believe Snape, she is not. Nevertheless, if Snape IS Evil, he will not acknowledge to Lupin whom he really saw on the map. It is especially questionable, IF we are not sure about the timing. How do we know that Snape indeed took a look on the Map only when Sirius already dragged Ron to Shack. Do we even know from anybody else that Shack is indeed off the Map? I just don't remember, but it could be so of course. IMO, Alla From stevejjen at earthlink.net Sun Jan 8 18:51:56 2006 From: stevejjen at earthlink.net (Jen Reese) Date: Sun, 08 Jan 2006 18:51:56 -0000 Subject: Let's talk about Lupin In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146103 > Marianne: > I'm going to come off as completely unfeeling here. But, that > line, while very understanding of Arthur with regards to Bill and > to Fleur's evidently undiminished love for her man, is a bit > condescending to Remus. After all, Remus spent a good part of the > previous year living in Grimmauld Place with a friend, Sirius, who > had once been very handsome and who was now anything but handsome > and whole. I think Remus was already well aware of what can happen > to young men when caught up in a war. Jen: That's a good point, and Remus certainly understands how suddenly and mercilessly life can change for a person. The reason I liked that line so much from Arthur was because it sounded like an acceptance to me toward Remus, an acknowledgement that he IS a man like Bill who happens to change into a werewolf for a few days a month, not a werewolf who happens to be a man occasionally. That he's standing with group of people who consider him much more than a comrade in the war, who care for him and want him to find happiness. OK, you can gag now. ;) But I don't think you unfeeling if you read the scene differently, FWIW. > Marianne: > Maybe it does. But, does that mean the love theme requires all > unattached people to become attached to someone before the series > ends? Maybe the barometer for whether or not characters are killed > off shouldn't be based on if their birthdays are celebrated on > JKR's website. Maybe the real key is that, if you're an adult, > and you're not paired off, you're dead. Doesn't look good for > Snape or Peter, does it? ;-) I'm undoubtedly making too much of > this. I accept everyone's counter opinions that Remus and Tonks > are a real couple, are really in love, etc. But my reactions are > colored by the way the scene felt when I first read it, and it > didn't come off to me as a particularly convincing. Jen: Hee, it's going to be a bloodbath in Book 7 then with all the unattached people around. Seriously though, I agree with you that we don't see evidence of Remus' feelings and the moment in the hospital ward seemed to come out of the blue. The reason it didn't bother me is not because I see true love in bloom, but that the shipping aspect of the books doesn't hold my attention. It's funny, while the shipping in the books seems like a diversion from the *real* story, my favorite section in the GOF movie was the time from the dancing lesson all the way through the ball (the music helped). And that made me realize as Magda said, perhaps JKR is not really the world's greatest romance writer :). I think in the case of Tonks/Lupin she sacrificed moments of building up their relationship to play up the red-herring of 'what's going on with Tonks?' Letting her mystery and adventure writing expertise win out over the romance. So, I just accept they're meant to be another canon couple and move on to the stuff that really grabs my attention. Jen From foxmoth at qnet.com Sun Jan 8 18:57:49 2006 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Sun, 08 Jan 2006 18:57:49 -0000 Subject: Did Snape see Peter on the Map or not? WAS: Re: Essays about Snape on Lexicon In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146104 Alla: > It is especially questionable, IF we are not sure about the timing. > How do we know that Snape indeed took a look on the Map only when > Sirius already dragged Ron to Shack. > > Do we even know from anybody else that Shack is indeed off the Map? > I just don't remember, but it could be so of course. Pippin: Harry, Lupin, and Sirius (and I suppose Ron and Hermione) have all seen the map and all of them accept Snape's story. They must know the map doesn't show the whole tunnel. Lupin says he saw Sirius pull Ron and Pettigrew into the tunnel, so obviously they had entered it by the time Snape saw the map. Since the map doesn't show the whole tunnel, Ron needn't have been dragged all the way to the shack before going out of sight. After Lupin enters the tunnel, Hagrid comes by and "meanders" up to the castle. It's only after he's reached it that Snape appears, so it's certainly possible that Ron and the rest were out of sight on the map when Snape looked at it.. That isn't the only questionable point in the essay. It also describes Snape as looking at Harry with sheer hatred at the opening feast, when canon only says that Harry got the impression Snape didn't like him at all. He didn't decide that Snape hated him until later, after classes began. Pippin From bboyminn at yahoo.com Sun Jan 8 19:01:28 2006 From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Sun, 08 Jan 2006 19:01:28 -0000 Subject: Let's talk about Lupin - True Love at Last? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146105 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "lindseyharrisst" wrote: > > ... - What does the group think of the Lupin shipping in HBP? > > I contend that it is... > a. not foreshadowed or calculable, even in retrospect, contrary to > most things in the books, esp. shipping bboyminn: The forshadowing in the books is not that Tonks loves Lupin, but that something is up with Tonks. We see she has lost her power to transform. We see that she is depressed and somewhat anti-social. So, the foreshadoing is merely that something is up. Now, because of comments made by various characters, we are lead, or should I say mislead, to believe it has something to do with Sirus, though I think that's not completely untrue. > Snapesangel continues: > > b. because it is a narrative afterthought, it was not well thought > out, what good could Lupin and Tonks see in each other (over > being with someone else, or alone)? bboyminn: No, I don't think it is a 'narrative afterthought' since the first clues appear in Chapter Four when Harry arrives at the Burrow. For it to appear that early in the book, it seems clear the author always intended for it to be there. IMHO > Snapesangel continues: > > c. does it seem in chracter for Lupin to fall in love (and with > Tonks)? > > d. Do you think it's authentic love on his or her part? > > I confess to having a belief he should be with another, but that > aside, I just don't see the point. > > Snapesangel bboyminn: First, I'm not sure I trust this 'love' just yet. There is a strange phenomenon associated with grief, where one tends to fall in love with the spouse of the deceased. I experienced this first hand when one of my closest friends died, and all my male friends fell in love with his widow. Of course, that 'love' was a grief disguise desire to be closer to the dearly departed and for some intimacy associated with my dead friend. Fortunately, at the time, I was living far enough away that I wasn't able to act on those urges, though, much to the amusement of the rest of us, a couple of my friends did. So, the point is that I'm not yet convinced that Tonk's feelings aren't misplaced grief. Also, I think they may stem from a certain degree of mothering instinct. Haven't you ever wondered why nice girls sometimes fall for the biggest jerks? It's because they have an overwhelming need to 'mother' them. (or perhaps, 'fix' them) As far as Lupin, I think he is a terribly close off individual, both socially and emotionally. He has the equivalent of AIDS, leprosy, and tuberculosis combined with a figurative equivalent of 'elephant mans' disease. He is an social outcast. I think he very much thinks that the world is repulsed by him, and is quietly and unobtrusively grateful for any human contact he gets. I really don't think he feels he deserves love; I really don't think he sees himself as worth of such a 'normal' emotion. Keep in mind that Lupin has been this 'social outcast' since he was a young child. I think his 'unworthiness' is very much ingrained in him, and at this stage, while he is able to feel tremendously grateful, I'm not sure if he is capable of feeling love. Still, with the love of a good woman, who knows, Tonks may be able to 'fix' him. Though, the odds are not good. Don't get me wrong. I don't not wish Lupin's fate on him. I hope he finds love, and lives a happy successful life, but at the sametime, the odds are not good. So, at this stage, I am grateful for any love that Lupin can find, but until we see it deepen and last and until we see it returned, I'm not ready to endorse it as 'true love' just yet. Just a few thoughts. Steve/bboyminn From quick_silver71 at yahoo.ca Sun Jan 8 19:17:13 2006 From: quick_silver71 at yahoo.ca (quick_silver71) Date: Sun, 08 Jan 2006 19:17:13 -0000 Subject: Harry and Love RE:Special treatment of Harry or not WAS In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146106 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Ceridwen" wrote: > Ceridwen: > I agree that it's disappointing that JKR doesn't seem, at this point, > to regard detention as anything more than a nuisance. I think, > though, that it shows Harry has become more jaded over the years > about the things he does that hurt other people. It's another thing > he'll have to get over before his meeting with Voldemort. A jaded > attitude, even though it's still only developing, is counter to the > love that is supposed to be Harry's greatest weapon. I was pleased > that he was horrified over what he accidentally did. He was far too > loose with his slashing, too. If he'd just flicked his wand, he > would probably not have inflicted such major injuries, IMO. > Hopefully, he learned the lesson of not overreacting in a tense > situation, something he *will* need later on. > Ceridwen: (In another post) > But, kchuplis brought up two scenarios: Blowing up Aunt Marge, and >slashing Draco. His reaction to the Aunt Marge episode, though not >as horrible as the Draco episode, got more worry out of him than >slashing Draco so that the bathroom was awash in blood. That's >disturbing. Aunt Marge floats away, the Ministry rearranges >memories, Harry's given a slap on the wrist and not kicked out of the >WW, Aunt Marge is fine if lacking a memory (unfortunately, the WW >didn't see fit to give her a personality change as well!), and that >*seems* to carry more weight than buckets of blood? Yes, I would say >he is becoming jaded. To mishaps, to detention, to what he can get >away with. And I think that will be another thing, along with his >capacity for hate, which he'll have to release, probably very early >in book 7, in order for the love power he has to be able to vanquish >the Dark Lord. You've wrote several amazing posts. However I disagree with the idea that Harry must let go of habits/traits/whatever else so that he can be filled with "love power." I'm not saying that he shouldn't let go of those trait because he must definitely should. It just that I feel that "love" is either Harry's must overrated ability or his most misunderstood one. The problem, from my point of view, is that I don't have a handle on what exactly Harry's love ability is supposed to be. A lot of people say that Harry's love will fill him up with power, deflect AKs, give him the ability to forgive Snape, to find a way to have mercy on Voldemort, find a humane (non-AK) way to deal with Voldemort, etc, etc. It's just that that's never the feeling I got from the books. Harry seems to be relatively normal in his abilities to love, maintain relationships, etc (although some would say that he's stunted in his ability to love). That, to me, is central about Harry he basically normal in his ability to love it's not Harry's unique ability to love, his greater then average ability to love but the mere fact that he can that is important. That is what makes Harry different Voldemort who can't really love not by the definition JK seems to be working with anyway. So basically I don't work on the assumption that Harry's abilities to love is special compared to Hermione's, Ron's, Neville's, Draco's, etc but that it is special compared to Voldemort's. For me Harry's love is more about it giving him the ability to experience love but not only love but also empathy, sympathy, pity, mercy the feelings and abilities that come from being able to love (I simplified a bit there). Those are things that Voldemort doesn't have and I think that he is poorer because of it. Those are the things that I feel make Harry keep on fighting against Voldemort (sort of like on the Matrix where Agent Smith asks Neo why he get's up to keep fighting). That's why I feel that Harry's needs to undergo extensive training so that he doesn't have to rely on the Dark Arts to give that extra punch in the middle of a battle. I wouldn't be entirely surprised if a large part of the final book was spent on the Horcrux hunt because it gives Harry and co. such a good chance to learn both magic and about themselves. However I view love as being one component of Harry Potter, although it may be a defining component, it is not the only component and it does require the support of the other components. For all of Dumbledore talk about love I can't help but notice that he's always an incredibly wizard as well so apparently love isn't everything. Quick_Silver From foxmoth at qnet.com Sun Jan 8 19:32:07 2006 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Sun, 08 Jan 2006 19:32:07 -0000 Subject: /ESE!lupin questions (long) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146107 Christina and Marianne raised some interesting questions about ESE!Lupin. Before answering, I'd like to point out that ESE!Lupin is really a theory about the plot rather than the character. The basic assumption is not that Lupin is a rotter, but that the books overall have a mystery plot. That is, an unidentified character is responsible for much of what is wrong with the protagonist's world, and the discovery of this character is essential to the resolution of the story. It's possible that Pettigrew was indeed the only spy, that Lucius Malfoy, Snape or Crouch sent the Lestranges after the Longbottoms, that Bella killed Sirius. But as solutions to a mystery plot that would be pretty dull. > Christina: > > Sirius's death scene is *very* hard to block out, just because it is a > fast-action battle scene with many players, in which Harry is not > paying much attention. Pippin: It's just as hard for the other players to pay attention to everything that goes on in the room. But Neville and Harry are clearly put at the bottom tier of steps. "Harry seized Neville by the shoulder of his robes and lifted him bodily onto the first tier of stone steps. Neville's legs jerked and twitched and would not support his weight. Harry heaved again with all the strength he possessed and they climbed another step--" Then a spell hits them and they fall backward to the step below. The prophecy breaks, and then Dumbledore arrives. At that point Harry "had no more thought of leaving." So they're actually not above the dais at all. They're lying on the floor *below* it. We're not told that Harry moves again until Sirius dies. Whatever he saw, it was while he was on the floor struggling to help Neville, who was hit with a curse that made his legs jerk uncontrollably. Christina: . If Lupin was the origin of > the second jet of light, wouldn't Harry have noticed a difference? > After all, Bellatrix is standing above Lupin, and if Lupin wanted to > cast a spell with his wand covertly, he would have to be holding it at > his side. The trajectory of a spell coming from Lupin would have been > so different from one coming from Bella that Harry should have noticed > this difference immediately. Pippin: That's why I noted that Lupin uses wandless magic. Quirrell attempts a wandless killing curse in PS/SS so we know it can be done. Lupin would need to be almost directly behind Bella. It would take careful aim, but Kingsley does something like that earlier in OOP. His memory charm passes very close to Harry on its way to Marrietta. If Lupin blocked Harry's view of the spell's trajectory partly blocked his view of Bella, Harry wouldn't be able to see who had cast it. It would be convoluted for Harry to figure all this out, but all that has to happen in terms of the story is for Harry to realize that he actually didn't see Bella do it. I don't think I have to recount all the times Harry has mistaken his suppositions for reality. > > Christina: I think what you are saying is that perhaps Lupin made Sirius think that Harry knew more about the prophecy than he actually did. Pippin: I don't think Dumbledore discussed the prophecy with Sirius at all. Dumbledore says that the blame lies with him and him alone that Harry did not know that Voldemort might try to lure him to the DoM. The Order doesn't seem to have been told why they were guarding the DoM. It's not clear whether even Snape knew at the time what Voldemort was after, though obviously he knew about the prophecy itself. But there is canon that Lupin and Sirius share some secret, because they exchange a glance when Sirius starts talking about the 'weapon.' The reason for not giving the Order information on the prophecy which Voldemort already has is obvious: it means anyone who uses that knowledge can only have learned it from LV. That's a pretty big clue both for Dumbledore and for us. Even if Dumbledore had told Sirius, he would have warned him not to speak openly of it. Sirius would not have yelled. Bella is twenty feet from the doors and isn't shouting when she asks for the prophecy. Neville is sobbing at her feet, so it's a bit far fetched that Sirius would have heard her from behind a door. No one mentions the prophecy after the fight begins except the DE who captures Harry, and he growls it into his ear. > Christina: I think what Alla is trying to say (and I agree > with her here) is that Sirius suspecting Lupin isn't very good > evidence that Lupin is ESE. Alla was providing an instance where one > character suspected another of being ESE and was wrong (something > that, IIRC, happens a few times in the series). So, saying that > Sirius's suspicions of Lupin is evidence of ESE!Lupin is kind of like > saying that Lupin and Dumbledore's suspicions of Sirius can be used as > evidence for ESE!Sirius. Pippin: They certainly were until Sirius convinced us that Peter had betrayed the secret. Sirius assumed that Peter must have been the spy. But he offered no evidence. He just bullied Peter into confessing. But should we accept that confession at face value? There's a link to Amnesty International on JKR's website. Would she really want her heroes to sentence someone without a fair trial, solely on the basis of a confession extracted under duress? Would she show such a confession to be trustworthy? Maybe JKR wasn't thinking about it. But she insists that she takes a great deal of care with the plot and the messages she's sending. Though she admits to being careless about maths, I see no reason to doubt her about this. > > Christina: > many members of the WW have been kind and friendly to Lupin during the > series, and so he should feel no "need" to cut his fellow werewolves > slack. Why does he care if they approve of him? He does not need > their friendship. Pippin: Doesn't he? Who was there to keep him company during his transformations once he left Hogwarts? What happened when James and Sirius got old enough and wise enough to feel guilty about what they'd been doing? How would Lupin feel if he discovered that they weren't willing to put their guilty feelings aside after he'd done it so many times for them? He's not sitting near any of his old friends in Moody's photograph. Where was Lupin between the fall of Voldemort and PoA? We know where the teachers were, we know what the Weasleys were doing, we know what happened to the other Marauders, but Lupin's history is a complete and suspicious blank. If he was with the werewolves all that time, he could have become very close to them. I agree with you that Lupin has a conscience. But we never see it chide him into taking responsibility for the consequences of his actions. In PoA, he's terribly remorseful because he *might* have bitten any of the children, but not a word about how sorry he is that Pettigrew escaped. The reason he gives for not telling Dumbledore what he knew about Sirius was not hidden misgivings about Sirius's guilt, but fear that he would lose Dumbledore's trust over what had happened years before. For that, he was willing to let the school be surrounded by dementors, and he does not change his mind even after they attack Harry, even after Sirius breaks into Gryffindor tower. He was willing to take the risk that Harry would die or have his soul sucked out - rather than face the consequences of his betrayal. Christina: > I'm going to step back for a second and mention one more thing here, > because your comment really hit on one of my biggest personal > objections to ESE!Lupin. One of JKR's primary themes in the series is > discrimination and prejudice. Throughout his life, people are afraid > of Lupin and suspect him of wrongdoing *solely* because he is a > werewolf. We do not know exactly why Sirius thought Lupin was a spy, > but I'll bet that your exact line of thinking was going through the > back of his head ("All the werewolves are turning to Voldemort, Remus > has been so good at keeping secrets from people in the past, etc"). > We know that most werewolves really *are* turning to Voldemort, and > we've met Fenrir Greyback, who I'd argue is the epitome of werewolfish > evil, and Lupin's foil. What would it say if Lupin ultimately *did* > end up being evil? The public was right all along! Werewolves really > *can't* be trusted; they are inherently Dark and can follow no path > but one of evil. Pippin: It's Harry's story, not Lupin's. If Harry, Ron and Hermione reached this conclusion it would indeed undermine JKR's message. They'd be no better than Fudge and his public after all, who weren't willing to take a chance there might be decent giants when as far as they knew all giants were all evil. But I think the Trio is better than Fudge. They have to be, don't they, for JKR's argument to have any force? How is she going to show that? If the Trio judge all the other werewolves by Lupin's choices, good or bad, they're making the same mistake Fudge is. > Pippin: > > Peter's stellar incompetence as a spy > > Christina: > > Not sure where you're going with this one, but we *know* that Peter is > a spy. We've seen him in DE mode, and he's admitted to it. Also, I > wouldn't say that Peter is as generally incompetent as people like to > think he is (many fans, and James and Sirius). He is competent enough > to bring Voldemort back to life without messing things up. And he is > *extremely* competent as a *spy* - the man can turn into a rat! Pippin: I agree Peter may not be quite as incompetent as everyone thinks. But that doesn't turn him into Superspy! Peter, who could fool a great leglilmens like Dumbledore for at least a year. There's not a hint anywhere that Peter is good at occlumency. Surely he betrayed the Secret and was branded with the Dark Mark. But who betrayed the secret keeper? Peter himself? or someone else? James and Sirius suspected Lupin, but Lily also knew who the real secret keeper was. If she trusted Lupin did she tell him about the switch? Did Lupin try to use that knowledge to bargain with Voldemort for Lily's life? > Pippin: > > his attempt to kill Peter in cold blood > > Christina: > I'm not sure how you mean this. Are you referring to the fact that > Lupin was able and willing to kill another human being? If you are, > well then so was Sirius, and we're not calling him ESE. Also, if > Lupin were ESE, I'd argue that he'd have less of a reason to want to > kill Peter. Pippin: Sirius was deranged after so much time in Azkaban. He breaks Ron's leg, he attacks the Fat Lady...he's not himself, not the man who speaks admiringly about Moody who never killed if he had a choice. Even so he speaks of what he's about to do as murder. But what excuse does Lupin have for putting an unarmed man who's begging for mercy to death in front of three children? Even in combat, with Ginny and Neville in danger, we don't see the Order using deadly force. > > Pippin: > >Fenrir Greyback's ability to predict the time of his transformations > >well enough that he can position himself to attack specific victims > >(HBP ch 16) > > Christina: > Well, anybody that wants to figure out when a werewolf will transform > can- it's at moonrise. All werewolves have the ability to know when > they will transform. That doesn't mean that all of them will use it > to evil ends. Again, this goes back to the idea that all werewolves > aren't evil simply because they can be. Pippin: It means that Harry's (and the narrator's) implication that Lupin transformed because the moon came from behind a cloud is all wrong. He either forgot completely that he was due to transform, or he deliberately arranged things so that Peter would have a chance to escape. The real spy couldn't afford to let Peter be questioned by Dumbledore, could he? Marianne: <> I suppose I could buy that, although if it turns out that you're right, I'll be sorely disappointed. However, a tip of the hat to you for sticking to your ESE!Lupin theory. My question, though, is why would Lupin need to know about the plan to kill DD and who would have told him about the Unbreakable Vow? Or would he have only known about the plan at the moment it was unfolding to its end on the Tower? If he knew well in advance of the plan, he might very well expect Draco to fail, but he wouldn't necessarily know anything about the possibility of Snape dying as a result of the UV. Pippin: In spy parlance, someone had to 'run' Draco. There had to be someone to communicate Voldemort's threats and instructions, and to whom Draco could report his progress with fixing the cabinet. I think Tonks was under Imperius when Harry ran into her outside the RoR. No doubt she was actually there to check on Draco. But she would have to report to someone, someone she could speak or write to without arousing suspicion. I just noticed that Lupin says he tried to follow Snape through the barrier and was thrown back...but I wonder if he couldn't have got through if he'd chosen to. Hmmm.... Marianne: Another big hesitation I have with ESE!Lupin is I forget why he would have turned to Vmort in the first place. Surely Lupin doesn't believe that he, a tainted dark creature, will be given the same rights as pure-bloods once the DEs are in power. Am I missing some other reason? Pippin: The other DE's might not know him as a werewolf. Voldemort wouldn't care. He'd probably think it was a fine joke if his pureblood servants were made to take orders from someone they'd detest even more than a halfblood, if they only knew. But as to why Lupin turned, IMO our best clue is probably the sheer length of OOP. Rowling gives Harry direct experience of how horrible it is to be the target of an oppressive regime. As Harry watches Umbridge confront Snape, he's not sure which one of them he'd like to see triumph over the other. For the werewolves, Voldemort vs the Ministry must be similar. Also, considering the reputation of werewolves in general and Greyback in particular, Lupin must have been dangerously naive to assume he'd been bitten by accident. He's always been ready to cut his friends too much slack. Who knows what he could have been talked into? Like Regulus he'd figure things out eventually. But if he'd already compromised himself, it might be too late. I think at the heart of things is a choice Harry will make: to recognize that a person he likes as much as Lupin could fall into evil, along with a choice to recognize that a person he hates as much as Snape could turn to good. Pippin From scarfyrre at yahoo.com Sun Jan 8 15:44:31 2006 From: scarfyrre at yahoo.com (scarfyrre) Date: Sun, 08 Jan 2006 15:44:31 -0000 Subject: Harry and detentions WAS: Special treatment of Harry or not In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146108 Lorel wrote: > While these responses from students does make me worry about the > future of education (if not our populace in general!), they are > universal enough that I would have been suspicious of a Harry who > paid careful attention all the time and showed remorse after every > infraction or detention, and I think he would have become a less > believable character for young readers as well. > > I'm long out of school, but I do remember carrying on conversations with my friends during lessons. At least when we weren't being lectured to and the teacher was paying attention. If not actual words by voice, then notes were constantly being passed about. Detention? Pffft. Yea, huge punishment to sit in a room for an extra hour after school. We were very annoyed when this happened, and certainly not frightened or contrite. Ms. Rowling is doing a great job conveying exactly how teenagers acted in school, and it seems the Brits are very similiar to the Yanks. Except we never called our teachers 'sir' or 'professor'. Besides, what it was like for us wasn't what it was like for Rowling. :) Scarfyrre From littleleah at handbag.com Sun Jan 8 19:33:35 2006 From: littleleah at handbag.com (littleleahstill) Date: Sun, 08 Jan 2006 19:33:35 -0000 Subject: Where Did Snape Go? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146109 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "lolita_ns" wrote: > > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "lagattalucianese" > wrote: > > > > La Gatta Lucianese: > > > > Where did Snape go after he fled from Hogwarts? > > > > Could he have at some earlier point swiped McGonagall's time turner > in > > order to whisk himself back to the early 1880s, just in time for a > > certain doctor, recently returned from Injah, to encounter a tall, > > lean, dark-haired, beaky individual slouching about his rooms in an > > old gray dressing gown, excelling at fencing and single-stick (when > is > > a wand not a wand?), conducting arcane chemical experiments, and > > anaesthetizing himself with work in the name of justice and a 7% > > solution to silence the demons in his mind? > > > > (Gatta has really got to stop smoking Floo Powder...) > > > Lolita: > > I agree with you - you have got to stop smoking suspicious > substances :) > > characters and still claim them to be fully yours... Hmmm... (snipped) > While I am at it, a nice touch for this absolutely cuckoo theory > would be the Not Really Dead and Employing a Time Turner to Jump Back > a Century and Impersonate Maicroft Holmes!Regulus Black. Really > plausible, eh? > > Besides, is there any canon evidence as to McGonagall having a Time > Turner? Just out of curiosity, of course... > > Anyway, enjoy those silly cigarettes for me too, will you? :)) > > Lolita Leah I think you may be both barking up the wrong trees here. After all, weren't Sherlock and his brother just plain 'misters'. Whereas Mr Holmes' arch nemesis was always referred to as Professor Moriaty Leah, taking a quick puff herself. From HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com Sun Jan 8 19:57:35 2006 From: HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com (HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com) Date: 8 Jan 2006 19:57:35 -0000 Subject: Weekly Chat, 1/8/2006, 1:00 pm Message-ID: <1136750255.22.90267.m8@yahoogroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 146111 Reminder from the Calendar of HPforGrownups http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/cal Weekly Chat Sunday January 8, 2006 1:00 pm - 1:00 pm (This event repeats every week.) Notes: Don't forget, chat happens today, 11 am Pacific, 2 pm Eastern, 7 pm UK time. Chat times do not change for Daylight Saving/Summer Time. Chat generally goes on for about 5 hours, but can last as long as people want it to last. To get into Chat, just go to the group online: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups and click on "Chat" in the lefthand menu. If you have problems with this, go to http://www.yahoo.com and in the bottom box on the left side of the page click on "Chat". Once you're logged into any room, type /join *g.HPforGrownups ; this should take you right in. If you have an Set up birthday reminders! http://us.rd.yahoo.com/cal_us/rem/?http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/cal?v=9&evt_type=13 Copyright 2006 Yahoo! Inc. All Rights Reserved. http://www.yahoo.com Privacy Policy: http://privacy.yahoo.com/ Terms of Service: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From katmac at katmac.cncdsl.com Sun Jan 8 20:33:45 2006 From: katmac at katmac.cncdsl.com (lagattalucianese) Date: Sun, 08 Jan 2006 20:33:45 -0000 Subject: Where Did Snape Go? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146112 > > I think you may be both barking up the wrong trees here. After all, > weren't Sherlock and his brother just plain 'misters'. Whereas Mr > Holmes' arch nemesis was always referred to as Professor Moriaty > > Leah, taking a quick puff herself. > La Gatta Lucianese: Yes, but calling himself "Professor" would be too much of a give-away, don't you think? And besides, Professor Moriarty didn't look anything like Snape. From katmac at katmac.cncdsl.com Sun Jan 8 20:41:59 2006 From: katmac at katmac.cncdsl.com (lagattalucianese) Date: Sun, 08 Jan 2006 20:41:59 -0000 Subject: Where Did Snape Go? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146113 > > Besides, is there any canon evidence as to McGonagall having a Time > Turner? Just out of curiosity, of course... > > Anyway, enjoy those silly cigarettes for me too, will you? :)) > > Lolita > La Gatta Lucianese: Hermione got one from her in PoA, so she could take double classes, the little swot. I doubt McGonagall would be in any hurry to return such a useful device to the MoM. Maybe she was in on what Snape and Dumbledore were up to, and being a good soul, passed it on to Snape in case he needed to get out of town in a hurry. I doubt Snape was Microft. Wrong build, and definitely wrong personality. Though I think the Diogenes Club would appeal to Snape. Alas, in sober fact, Gatta is allergic to silly cigarettes... From irene_mikhlin at btopenworld.com Sun Jan 8 21:25:34 2006 From: irene_mikhlin at btopenworld.com (IreneMikhlin) Date: Sun, 08 Jan 2006 21:25:34 +0000 Subject: [HPforGrownups] re: special treatment of harry or not/ Draco's special treatment In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <43C1834E.4050401@btopenworld.com> No: HPFGUIDX 146114 fuzz876i wrote: > Everyone keeps discussing the special treatment of Harry. What about the special treatment of Draco after the hippogriff attack in POA he walks into class and all Snape says is to settle down if that had been Harry or Ron they sure would have been in detention. Draco came to the lesson straight from the hospital wing. Probably Snape knew that, so it would be really odd for him to punish Draco for his enthusiasm in Potions. :-) Harry can complain all he wants, but he was late discussing quidditch. Not the same. Oh, and he was monstrously rude when Snape was substituting Lupin, I didn't feel that the points taken were unfair. Maybe Snape would punish Harry's lateness even if it was for important reason, I can easily see that. But it's never happened in the canon, so Harry comparing himself with Draco is just speculation. Irene From rdas at facstaff.wisc.edu Sun Jan 8 22:20:34 2006 From: rdas at facstaff.wisc.edu (susanbones2003) Date: Sun, 08 Jan 2006 22:20:34 -0000 Subject: Let's talk about Lupin - True Love at Last? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146115 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "susanbones2003" wrote: > >SNIPPED > > bboyminn: > > > > First, I'm not sure I trust this 'love' just yet. There is a strange phenomenon associated with grief, where one tends to fall in love with the spouse of the deceased. SNIPPED > > So, the point is that I'm not yet convinced that Tonk's feelings > > aren't misplaced grief. Also, I think they may stem from a certain > > degree of mothering instinct. Haven't you ever wondered why nice > girls> > sometimes fall for the biggest jerks? It's because they have an > overwhelming need to 'mother' them. (or perhaps, 'fix' them) > > As far as Lupin, I think he is a terribly close off individual, both socially and emotionally. He has the equivalent of AIDS, leprosy,and tuberculosis combined with a figurative equivalent of 'elephant mans'disease. He is an social outcast. I think he very much thinks that the world is repulsed by him, and is quietly and unobtrusively gateful for any human contact he gets. I really don't think he feels he deserves love; I really don't think he sees himself as worth of such a 'normal' emotion. > > > > Keep in mind that Lupin has been this 'social outcast' since he was > a > > young child. I think his 'unworthiness' is very much ingrained in > him, > > and at this stage, while he is able to feel tremendously grateful, > I'm > > not sure if he is capable of feeling love. Still, with the love of a > > good woman, who knows, Tonks may be able to 'fix' him. Though, the > > odds are not good. > > > > Don't get me wrong. I don't not wish Lupin's fate on him. I hope he > > finds love, and lives a happy successful life, but at the sametime, > > the odds are not good. > > > > So, at this stage, I am grateful for any love that Lupin can find, > but > > until we see it deepen and last and until we see it returned, I'm > not > > ready to endorse it as 'true love' just yet. > > > > Just a few thoughts. > > > > Steve/bboyminn > > Jen D writes: > It occured to me that while we may feel uneasy for Lupin and > Tonk's "romance," it isn't a settled, completed thing. JKR leads us > down the path on all sorts of things. I contend if it doesn't > feel "right" that may easily be a clue that there is more to be to be done with it, that JKR may have somewhere to go with it that moves > plot along. We are too ready to draw conclusions when I have a hunch that almost everything is up for grabs. Liked your thoughts Steve. Lupin does seem to have more than his share of self-loathing and mayhap she just wants to gow a character past that sort of> difficulty. > Jen D > > > From linda_hay at fc.brattleboro.k12.vt.us Sun Jan 8 20:01:23 2006 From: linda_hay at fc.brattleboro.k12.vt.us (skatinglibrarian) Date: Sun, 08 Jan 2006 20:01:23 -0000 Subject: Son of Snape Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146116 On her website JKR says that Luna Lovegood in not Snape's daughter, that he has no DAUGHTER. So, does he have a son? Do we know (without knowing it) who that son might be? Does it have anything to do with one of the central mysteries of the septology? I think the son of Snape could explain many of the minor and one of the major mysteries. JKR tends to have family groups bear a striking resemblence to one another... the Weasley, the Potters, the Blacks, the RIddles etc. Who looks like Snape ? so far the only one I've spotted that even comes close is Victor Krum. Round shouldered, sallow, large nose, a grumpy git. About the right age for what I have in mind. Second, to the question "was Snape ever loved" JKR says on her web site "yes". And I think I may have noticed something. When Harry gets into Snape's memory, he sees a hooked nose man yelling at a woman who is cowering, as a dark haired little boy looks on. What if the hook nosed man is Snape, the cowering woman his wife and the little boy his son? What if the argument has something to do about protecting Snape's family from Voldemort? Harry assumes that Snape is the litle boy, but his assumptions are not always right. So, if it is Snape's son, and even if he isn't Krum, what has happened to him? We know that Dumbledore can keep people hidden from Voldemort. He's done it with Harry and he tells Draco that he can hide his whole family. Is the reason Dumbledore trusts Snape something to do with having hidden Snape's son? perhaps his wife as well? It seems to me that someone desperate to escape the power of "the Dark Lord", who knows that you can't just resign, might work out a deal with Dumbledore to hide his family and to give him (Snape) a cover story about appearing to work as a member of the Order, while really spying for the Death Eaters ( and so forth, tie your mind in knots trying to figure it out). Now that we know about Unbreakable vows ... is there the possibility that there was one between Dumbledore and Snape? Dumbeldore will keep Snape's son hidden if Snape will work for the order? As for the events on the Astronomy Tower, has Dumbledore forced Snape to kill him when it is obvious that Draco has failed? Did Dumbedore wish to ensure that 1. Snape won't break the vow with Narcissa and die himself and 2. Draco, still a student, won't use an Unforgivable curse. Finally, having a well prepared mind and knowing that his powers are waning, is Dumbledore willing to sacrifice himself to help keep the game going? So there it is, the best I can do to create a unified Snape theory. skatinglibrarian From va32h at comcast.net Sun Jan 8 22:34:17 2006 From: va32h at comcast.net (va32h) Date: Sun, 08 Jan 2006 22:34:17 -0000 Subject: Winky/Bellatrix parallel? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146117 > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "justcarol67" wrote: > > > > Okay, I admit this sounds crazy, but I'm rereading GoF and I was > > struck by the following incomplete remark from the > > butterbeer-saturated Winky: > > > > "Master is--*hic*--trusting Winky with--*hic*--the most important-- > > *hic*--the most secret--" (Am. ed. 537). > > > > Compare Bellatrix's unfinished remark to Snape in "Spinner's End" > > regarding the man, er, whatever he is, that she considers to be *her* > > master: > > > > "The Dark Lord has, in the past, entrusted me with his most > > precious--" (HBP Am. ed. 29). > > va32h: I am going to be totally blasphemous here, and suggest that this might be JKR's habit of reusing the same wording/imagery (something she does often enough...) But I do think there was something Bellatrix was entrusted with, and I do think it's a horcrux (but not the locket, one of the other ones). va32h From luckdragon64 at yahoo.ca Sun Jan 8 22:43:06 2006 From: luckdragon64 at yahoo.ca (Bee Chase) Date: Sun, 8 Jan 2006 17:43:06 -0500 (EST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Son of Snape In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20060108224306.96380.qmail@web53314.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 146118 skatinglibrarian wrote: Second, to the question "was Snape ever loved" JKR says on her web site "yes". And I think I may have noticed something. When Harry gets into Snape's memory, he sees a hooked nose man yelling at a woman who is cowering, as a dark haired little boy looks on. What if the hook nosed man is Snape, the cowering woman his wife and the little boy his son? Now that we know about Unbreakable vows ... is there the possibility that there was one between Dumbledore and Snape? Dumbeldore will keep Snape's son hidden if Snape will work for the order? Luckdragon: I think if the hook nosed man in Snapes memory was Snape Harry would have recognised him, so I do believe Snape was the child in this memory. As for the unbreakable vow, yes; I do believe the one thing that would make DD trust Snape is if he had made an UV with him. This is why I cannot accept the ESE Snape theory. If DD really is dead, I believe Snape had to do the deed and his "Severus please" was akin to Petunia's "remember my last". --------------------------------- Find your next car at Yahoo! Canada Autos [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From katmac at katmac.cncdsl.com Sun Jan 8 23:38:00 2006 From: katmac at katmac.cncdsl.com (lagattalucianese) Date: Sun, 08 Jan 2006 23:38:00 -0000 Subject: /ESE!lupin questions (long) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146119 > > I think at the heart of things is a choice Harry will make: to recognize > that a person he likes as much as Lupin could fall into evil, along with > a choice to recognize that a person he hates as much as Snape could > turn to good. > > > Pippin > La Gatta Lucianese: I think you've been watching too many "Thin Man" mysteries. ;D From ginny343 at yahoo.com Mon Jan 9 00:29:34 2006 From: ginny343 at yahoo.com (ginny343) Date: Mon, 09 Jan 2006 00:29:34 -0000 Subject: Is Tonks clumsy or not? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146120 I can accept Tonks' change of patronus, her moodiness, her unability to change her appearance as being upset about her situation with Lupin. But what happened with her being clumsy? I felt that was a major part of her character development in OoP and I don't remember seeing any clumsiness in HBP. I can't imagine this as an oversight, surely JKR's editors would have noticed. It must be intentional. Any ideas on what is going on with this? Or did I just miss the clumsy parts? :) Ginny343 From agdisney at msn.com Mon Jan 9 00:36:59 2006 From: agdisney at msn.com (Andrea Grevera) Date: Sun, 8 Jan 2006 19:36:59 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Is Tonks clumsy or not? References: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146121 I can accept Tonks' change of patronus, her moodiness, her unability to change her appearance as being upset about her situation with Lupin. But what happened with her being clumsy? I felt that was a major part of her character development in OoP and I don't remember seeing any clumsiness in HBP. I can't imagine this as an oversight, surely JKR's editors would have noticed. It must be intentional. Any ideas on what is going on with this? Or did I just miss the clumsy parts? :) Ginny343 Andie: Maybe she is not clumsy because she is too depressed and isn't trying so hard. In OOP she was most clumsy when she was trying to *help* someone, like Mrs. Weasley in the kitchen with supper or hurrying in to Grimmuld & she knocks over the metal stand. Was it an umbrella stand? Don't have the book here because I finally got my husband into reading HP. She is not perky in HBP because of her love life so I assume her clumsyness left her too. Before posting to any list, you MUST read the group's Admin File! http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/files/Admin_Files/HBF_Text__MUST_READ Please use accurate subject headings and snip unnecessary material from posts to which you're replying! Yahoo! Groups Links [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From h2so3f at yahoo.com Mon Jan 9 01:06:43 2006 From: h2so3f at yahoo.com (h2so3f) Date: Mon, 09 Jan 2006 01:06:43 -0000 Subject: Is Tonks clumsy or not? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146122 Ginny343 wrote: > But what happened with her(Tonks) being clumsy? I felt that was a > major part of her character development in OoP and I don't remember > seeing any clumsiness in HBP. I can't imagine this as an oversight, > surely JKR's editors would have noticed. It must be intentional. > Any ideas on what is going on with this? Or did I just miss the > clumsy parts? CH3ed: I first thought after reading HBP that Tonks' clumsiness in OotP might have been a sign that she was nervous around Lupin (she didn't knock anything over when she went with the others (without Lupin) to visit Arthur at St. Mungo's). But then I remembered that Tonks told Harry when they first met that she had been so clumsy she almost fail on stealth and tracking during her auror exams, and she hadn't met Lupin then (assuming, of course, since she wasn't with the original OotP). So I guess her depression has an unexpectedly good side-effect in making her a lot less clumsy than normal. Guess we'll see in Book 7 whether it returns now that she is happy again. CH3ed :O) From bartl at sprynet.com Mon Jan 9 01:47:52 2006 From: bartl at sprynet.com (Bart Lidofsky) Date: Sun, 08 Jan 2006 20:47:52 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Where Did Snape Go? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <43C1C0C8.8030307@sprynet.com> No: HPFGUIDX 146123 > La Gatta Lucianese: > I doubt Snape was Microft. Wrong build, and definitely wrong > personality. Though I think the Diogenes Club would appeal to Snape. Bart: Besides, while the Sherlock Holmes stories have gone into the public domain, most of the characters are still protected under trademark. Bart From lunalovegood at shaw.ca Mon Jan 9 02:05:33 2006 From: lunalovegood at shaw.ca (tbernhard2000) Date: Mon, 09 Jan 2006 02:05:33 -0000 Subject: so, when Dumbledore sacrificed his life for Harry... Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146124 Did it have some kind of ameliorative effect, and was that sacrifice what Mr. Snape found so disgusting? Has some kind of protection been raised around Harry? Also, is perhaps the Horcrux search merely a feigned one, and the real ultimately successful ploy, will that be some as yet untold thing? Well, I sure as hell think so. I mean, come on, does anyone really think Rowling has laid everything out so all we really have to do is watch the trio become superheroes? dan From Nanagose at aol.com Mon Jan 9 02:14:16 2006 From: Nanagose at aol.com (spotsgal) Date: Mon, 09 Jan 2006 02:14:16 -0000 Subject: /ESE!lupin questions (long) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146125 Christina: Thanks for your lengthy and speedy reply, Pippin! *rubs hands together* > Pippin: > So they're actually not above the dais at all. They're lying on the > floor *below* it. > We're not told that Harry moves again until Sirius dies. Whatever he > saw, it was while he was on the floor struggling to help Neville, > who was hit with a curse that made his legs jerk uncontrollably. Christina When Harry goes running to Sirius at the top of page 806, he is described as running down "the steps," plural. He is also described as "reaching the floor" and "reaching the ground." So he couldn't possibly have been on the floor already. So, the question then becomes: how many steps did Harry have to run down to reach the floor? Before I get to that, I'd just like to add that the stone steps aren't small; they are steep and are arranged in a bench-like configuration, meant so that people can sit on one step and comfortably put their feet down on the next. How do we know that Harry is climbing up the actual benches and not some set of smaller steps? "Harry heaved again with all the strength he possessed and they climbed another step; a spell hit the stone bench at Harry's heel (page 804)." Okay, let's go through the scene. Lupin tells Harry to get out, he grabs Neville, and "lifted him bodily onto the first tier of stone steps." Then they "climbed another step." So they are now at least on the second large stone step. A spell hits the bench at Harry's foot, and he falls to the step below. Neville is said to fall to the "ground," which I guess we can assume is the actual ground. So now Harry is on the first step. This is where the canon gets fuzzy, because it seems to contradict itself. Harry grabs Neville and lifts him up; that's when the prophecy drops, *but* it's said to drop onto the "step beneath them." So Harry and Neville must at this point be on at least the second step. There is absolutely no other way to make sense of the action. We know that Neville is kind of hanging off Harry at this point, but there's no mention as to whether Harry himself is sitting or standing. JKR doesn't note him standing up when he starts to run towards Sirius, but that doesn't really prove anything one way or the other. While Harry is running down the steps, he pulls out his wand, sees Dumbledore turning towards the dais, sees Sirius's face as he's falling into the veil, sees the veil flutter and fall into place, and hears Bellatrix's scream of triumph. Now yes, a lot of these things happened at the same time, but the time between Harry's running start and his reaching the floor is a lot longer than it would take to just hop down two steps. Also, when Harry hits the floor, his breath is in "searing gasps," which makes no sense if Harry was just a step above the floor (or already on the floor). Another bit just to add a wrench in the works -- once Lupin drags Harry away from the dais, he brings him over to stand near the benches. Then, "Neville had slid down the stone benches one by one to the place where Harry stood (page 808)." It can be argued of course, but I find it *very* hard to believe that Neville could have gotten up any steps on his own. Harry hadn't just been giving him a boost earlier, he had been *dragging* Neville up the stairs with every bit of his strength. Also consider the fact that a very small amount of time goes by in between the time that Harry leaves Neville and the time that Neville is described as sliding down the steps. So I would argue that Harry and Neville were higher up than just a step or two (which are really quite large on their own, I'd like to stress again). "One by one" isn't an expression that's really used when describing one or two things. > Pippin: > That's why I noted that Lupin uses wandless magic. Quirrell > attempts a wandless killing curse in PS/SS so we know it can be > done. Christina: Yes, but even wandless magic comes from somewhere. Spells are visible, and so they must have a visible origin. IIRC, Quirrell uses his hands, and it makes the most sense that wandless magic would originate from a person's hands or fingers, which can look and function like a wand. Since Lupin can't exactly raise his arm to cast a wandless spell, the spell probably came from his hands at his side. The spell hits Sirius in the chest (and the dais is raised), so the trajectory must have been pretty slanted. > Pippin: > Lupin would need to be almost directly behind Bella...If Lupin > blocked Harry's view of the spell's trajectory partly blocked his > view of Bella, Harry wouldn't be able to see who had cast it. Christina: The only way that I can think of for Harry's view of Bella and Lupin to be partially obstructed is if Lupin and Bella both had their backs to Harry, with Lupin standing behind Bellatrix, so that the top of her body and a sliver of her side was all Harry could see. I'll grant you the plausibility of that scenario, but then Harry's view of Sirius would also have been blocked, and we know that he could see Sirius quite well. > Pippin: > It would be convoluted for Harry to figure all this out, but all > that has to happen in terms of the story is for Harry to realize > that he actually didn't see Bella do it. I don't think I have to > recount all the times Harry has mistaken his suppositions for > reality. Christina: Oh, you definitely don't :) Harry misinterprets what he sees loads of times, but I've found that his errors tend to be of the interpretive sort, not the factual sort. For example, he catches Molly giving Lupin a "look" in HBP that Harry interprets "as though Lupin was the one who was at fault for Fleur" (or something, I paraphrased that). We know that Harry was wrong in his *interpretation* of Molly's action (she was giving Lupin a "look" because Tonks was upset), but Harry was right about the look itself. The books are slanted by Harry's interpretations of the events that he sees, but it isn't often that he is completely mistaken about what he is literally seeing. He misinterprets the conversation between Quirrell and Snape in PS/SS, but the action and dialogue that he sees is true. Now I know that you find the origins of the second jet of light ambiguous (because there is no source specified). I think it's unlikely that Lupin stealthily knocking Sirius back could have escaped Harry's notice (remarkable, Harry *is* paying attention to the scene for once), but you don't, so I guess we'll just agree to disagree there. > Pippin: > I don't think Dumbledore discussed the prophecy with Sirius at all. > Dumbledore says that the blame lies with him and him alone that > Harry did not know that Voldemort might try to lure him to the DoM. Christina: Which also makes sense without ESE!Lupin, considering the fact that Dumbledore is the one regulating the amount of information that Harry gets. > Pippin: > The Order doesn't seem to have been told why they were guarding the > DoM. It's not clear whether even Snape knew at the time what > Voldemort was after, though obviously he knew about the prophecy > itself. But there is canon that Lupin and Sirius share some secret, > because they exchange a glance when Sirius starts talking about the > 'weapon.' Christina: I buy that Sirius and Lupin know about the prophecy, and that's why they share the look (they try and decide how much to tell Harry). What I don't see canon for is the fact that the rest of the Order *doesn't* know about the prophecy. Molly stops Lupin and Sirius from continuing to give Harry information right at the point that they're talking about the weapon. Molly tells Lupin and Sirius to stop talking, so obviously she must have known that there was more to tell. The prophecies can only be lifted from the shelves by the people that are named in them. If only those people can take them, then they can't really be studied by Unspeakables or anybody else. Dumbledore mentions a "Keeper" which sounds a bit like a Librarian. The only possible purpose of the room is a storage facility, one that is filled with a whole *lot* of prophecies. The ceilings are as "high as a church (page 777)" and are filled with "towering" shelves that go on as far as Harry can see, and there are at least 97 rows of them. Now, yes, JKR's favorite subject isn't math, but she makes very clear that there's a huge number of prophecies, all of which apply to at least one person. Those people must know that the prophecies are there, otherwise what's the point of storing them at all? Even without being told, the Order members should have been able to figure out what they were guarding. Okay, let's say that's a bigger leap than you're willing to make. Dumbledore says on page 829 that Harry's vision of Rookwood was him "telling Voldemort what *we* had known all along -- that the prophecies in the Ministry of Magic are heavily protected??? (emphasis mine). If Dumbledore didn't tell the Order that they were protecting a prophecy, then who is the "we" he talks about? Is there any canon that supports the idea that the Order was kept in the dark about the prophecy? > Pippin: > Bella is twenty feet from the doors and isn't shouting when she > asks for the prophecy. Neville is sobbing at her feet, so it's a bit > far fetched that Sirius would have heard her from behind a door. > Even if Dumbledore had told Sirius, he would have warned him not > to speak openly of it. Sirius would not have yelled. Christina: Actually, there is no description of the way Bellatrix speaks. This sounds really nitpicky, but it's one of the only times that a description of dialogue *isn't* given. There's no "Bellatrix said," or "Bellatrix shouted." There's only her words, and there *is* an exclamation point at the end of them. Neville was making some noise, so all the more reason for her to have shouted. And the room is described as a "cavernous" one that echoes. You make a good point, but I don't think it's *that* farfetched that the Order members could have heard Bellatrix's words beforehand. The DoM also seems to be a bit maze-like and Harry is described as hearing things from other rooms a few times. I think it's also reasonable to think that perhaps the Order was winding their way through the DoM and heard one of the times Lucius shouted about getting the prophecy. It's fairly obvious when the Order barges in that even if Harry doesn't know about the prophecy, the Death Eaters certainly do. As far as Sirius was concerned, the cat was pretty much out of the bag, and some serious stuff was happening, so who cares? Sirius isn't much for secrecy anyhow. >> Christina: >> So, saying that Sirius's suspicions of Lupin is evidence of >> ESE!Lupin is kind of like saying that Lupin and Dumbledore's >> suspicions of Sirius can be used as evidence for ESE!Sirius. > Pippin: > They certainly were until Sirius convinced us that Peter had > betrayed the secret. Sirius assumed that Peter must have been > the spy. But he offered no evidence. He just bullied Peter into > confessing. But should we accept that confession at face > value? Christina: They were considered evidence for ESE!Sirius, but those suspicions turned out to be wrong. And yes, we should absolutely accept Peter's confession. He wasn't killed straight-out (thanks to Lupin, btw, who encouraged exploring the facts before taking action); Peter was asked to defend himself, to answer Lupin's questions. Hermione, who has always been a supporter of fairness and truth, interjects her own questions. Sirius asks Peter plainly, about being a spy, "Do you deny it?" Peter could have said yes and continued to argue, but he didn't. Instead, he made excuses for his behavior. And we now know that Peter can and has gone to Voldemort of his own volition simply to protect himself. > Pippin: > There's a link to Amnesty International on JKR's website. Would she > really want her heroes to sentence someone without a fair trial, > solely on the basis of a confession extracted under duress? Christina: Of course not! That is precisely why our *hero* does NOT sentence someone without a fair trial. Harry is our hero, and in the Shack scene he quite literally throws himself in front of the wands of two people about to commit murder in order to save Peter from death. Harry, our hero, is merciful and compassionate and just (er, here at least). He demands that Peter be taken to the castle, where he can be sent to Azkaban or given other fair punishment for his crimes. Sirius and Remus were both wrong to want to take revenge, and it is through Harry's purity of soul that he saves them from becoming vengeful killers (and from committing an act that we now know would have split their souls). I think that JKR makes it painfully clear that Sirius and Lupin were completely wrong in wanting to take revenge. > Pippin: > Would she show such a confession to be trustworthy? Maybe JKR wasn't > thinking about it. But she insists that she takes a great deal of > care with the plot and the messages she's sending. Christina: She absolutely upholds her message in the Shack scene -- the fact that Peter really was a spy has nothing to do with it. The confession *is* trustworthy, but no punishment is taken out on Peter. Obviously, since the Shack scene Harry has witnessed Peter bringing the Dark Lord back to life -- he now has all the evidence he needs -- but in PoA he saves Peter and is compared to his father (still Mr. Awesome at that point) for doing it. >> Christina: >> What would it say if Lupin ultimately *did* end up being evil? The >> public was right all along! Werewolves really *can't* be trusted; >> they are inherently Dark and can follow no path but one of evil. > Pippin: > It's Harry's story, not Lupin's. If Harry, Ron and Hermione reached > this conclusion it would indeed undermine JKR's message. They'd be > no better than Fudge and his public after all, who weren't willing > to take a chance there might be decent giants when as far as they > knew all giants were all evil. But I think the Trio is better than > Fudge. They have to be, don't they, for JKR's argument to have any > force? How is she going to show that? If the Trio judge all the > other werewolves by Lupin's choices, good or bad, they're making the > same mistake Fudge is. Christina: It also isn't Voldemort's story, or Dumbledore's story, or Snape's story, but that doesn't mean that these characters won't have huge plot *and* thematic significance (even beyond their relation to Harry and the way Harry views them). And HRH don't have to voice prejudices about werewolves for them to exist. It is only by knowing Lupin that the Weasley's have struck down their prejudices about werewolves. Ron reacts in violent fear in the Shack when he first hears that Lupin is a werewolf. > Pippin: > I agree Peter may not be quite as incompetent as everyone thinks. > But that doesn't turn him into Superspy! Peter, who could fool a > great leglilmens like Dumbledore for at least a year. There's not a > hint anywhere that Peter is good at occlumency. Christina: Well first of all, *somebody* fooled Dumbledore for at least a year, something that has always kind of surprised me because, really, how difficult is it to flush out a spy among a small group of people? Put the Potters in a safe house, tell Sirius, Peter, and Lupin different locations for them, and see which location gets attacked. Simple! Also, do we have any reason to believe that Lupin is any good at Occlumency? > Pippin: > He either forgot completely that he was due to transform, or he > deliberately arranged things so that Peter would have a chance to > escape. The real spy couldn't afford to let Peter be questioned by > Dumbledore, could he? Christina: Lupin's carelessness with his potion was stupid and uncharacteristic for somebody so meticulous, but lots of stupid mistakes have been made by various characters in the series (particularly those in the ever-popular DADA position). Moody, the most paranoid person ever, manages to get himself locked in a trunk for nine months. Snape takes the UV, which was completely stupid no matter where you think his loyalties lie. I don't think Lupin needs to "forget" his transformation or purposefully put himself near students during it; taking the text at face value works for me here -- Lupin saw that somebody that he thought had been dead was actually alive, which has major implications for the happenings of what is arguably the most important event in Lupin's life. Everything he thought he knew up to that point -- wrong! I think it'd be enough to send any normally rational person running for the door. > Pippin: > > The other DE's might not know him as a werewolf. Voldemort wouldn't > care. He'd probably think it was a fine joke if his pureblood > servants were made to take orders from someone they'd detest even > more than a halfblood, if they only knew. Christina: Maybe -- I find it a bit of a stretch. I can't see Voldemort finding amusement in that, any more than I can see him finding amusement in his *own* rule over the purebloods (considering the fact that he is a half-blood). Somehow, I doubt he chuckles to himself about it. He seems to like the pureblood ideal and be ashamed of his own "dirty blood." Why would he find amusement in disrupting the order he has fought to maintain? Also, Lupin has been publicly outed as a werewolf. Even if the DE's hadn't known about his werewolf status way back when, they certainly know about it now, considering it was a scandal at the school that their children attend. I can't see them accepting him into their inner circle enough so that, for example, Bellatrix would so calmly and smoothly take credit for Sirius's death (the triumphant scream). I'd imagine she's be more likely to say, "Huh?" > Pippin: > I think at the heart of things is a choice Harry will make: to > recognize that a person he likes as much as Lupin could fall into > evil, along with a choice to recognize that a person he hates as > much as Snape could turn to good. Christina: I have similar thoughts to yours, but I think that Harry must learn that even people who are nice can do bad things, while people who are mean can do good things. Snape comes in as an example for the latter (IMO), while examples from the former include pretty much all of our good guys (James comes to mind as a biggie). I think we've already seen examples of people that Harry likes turning to evil. He doesn't seem to mind Quirrell. They're not best pals, but Harry certainly doesn't think he has the capacity for evil. Also, BCJ-as-Moody serves as a sort of protector for Harry in GoF. He certainly teaches him some useful skills and seems to want to help Harry succeed -- but turns out to be evil. I can't remember Harry's precise feelings about BCJ-as-Moody, but he seems to like him well enough. Whew! I think that's it for now. Sorry in advance for spelling errors. Christina From sherriola at earthlink.net Mon Jan 9 02:58:17 2006 From: sherriola at earthlink.net (Sherry Gomes) Date: Sun, 8 Jan 2006 18:58:17 -0800 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: /ESE!lupin questions (long) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <00a801c614c8$8b0e1b10$0400a8c0@pensive> No: HPFGUIDX 146126 > Pippin: > I don't think Dumbledore discussed the prophecy with Sirius at all. > Dumbledore says that the blame lies with him and him alone that > Harry did not know that Voldemort might try to lure him to the DoM. Christina: Which also makes sense without ESE!Lupin, considering the fact that Dumbledore is the one regulating the amount of information that Harry gets. Sherry now: i think the answer to how Sirius and Lupin knew the prophecy is so obvious and easy to understand. I believe Alla mentioned it last night, but i will again. i am sure that James and Lily would have told Sirius about the prophecy. possibly Lupin as well. We don't know if the potters suspected Lupin, only that Sirius did. however, if James and lily were making Sirius their son's guardian, I can't imagine that they would not have told him everything, in order for him to have the full picture, so he could protect Harry from danger if anything happened to them. it could also explain part of why Sirius thought using peter as secret keeper would be a good idea. Another way to try to send Voldemort off the track of the potters. more urgency with baby Harry so much at risk. > Pippin: > I think at the heart of things is a choice Harry will make: to > recognize that a person he likes as much as Lupin could fall into > evil, along with a choice to recognize that a person he hates as > much as Snape could turn to good. Christina: I have similar thoughts to yours, but I think that Harry must learn that even people who are nice can do bad things, while people who are mean can do good things. Snape comes in as an example for the latter (IMO), while examples from the former include pretty much all of our good guys (James comes to mind as a biggie). sherry now: I don't think Harry needs to learn that lesson again. He's already been betrayed by people he liked or trusted. On a purely emotional level, i can't stand the idea of Harry's last connection to his parents and Sirius turning out to be evil. When the war is over and Voldemort vanquished, i want Harry to be able to listen to Marauder stories and stories of his parents life together, his months of life before Voldemort killed his parents. For even deeper emotional reasons, because of the resonance with which the marauders story touched my heart, I want there to be one marauder still standing at the end. Standing and happy at last, standing for James and lily and Sirius. Harry needs that, i think. he doesn't need anymore betrayals. One last connection to his parents and Sirius, in the end, when he's all done being a hero who needs to go it alone. Sherry From h2so3f at yahoo.com Mon Jan 9 03:13:36 2006 From: h2so3f at yahoo.com (h2so3f) Date: Mon, 09 Jan 2006 03:13:36 -0000 Subject: Did Snape see Peter on the Map or not? WAS: Re: Essays about Snape on Lexicon In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146127 Alla asked: "Do we even know from anybody else that Shack is indeed off the Map? I just don't remember, but it could be so of course." CH3ed: I don't have PoA with me, but I remember when the twins gave Harry the Marauder's Map all three of them examined it and Harry noticed that several tunnels run off the map in the direction of Hogsmeade (but Hogmeade itself is off the Map). It seems they also knew where the other tunnels go to, except for the one with the Whomping Willow guarding it, so I'd deduce that the Shrieking Shack isn't on the Map (the twins either have gotten caugth by Filch in or around the tunnels that they said that Filch knew about, or they've seen Filch use them. And another tunnel also leads to an unknown location in Hogsmeade but is now inaccessible due to a cave in during Harry's 2nd year). CH3ed :O) From foodiedb at optonline.net Mon Jan 9 02:55:02 2006 From: foodiedb at optonline.net (foodiedb) Date: Mon, 09 Jan 2006 02:55:02 -0000 Subject: Lupin and Filch and This and That In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146128 > La Gatta Lucianese wrote: > > Awww...I loved the scene where he was waltzing with Mrs. Norris! > I agree that was a great scence, I guess I am talking more about the way he trotted in to main hall in a silly way and the way he kept on messing up the cannon firing. Don't get me wrong, I thought those scenes were funny, I just don't know if I like the change in his character. foodiedb From catlady at wicca.net Mon Jan 9 03:39:51 2006 From: catlady at wicca.net (Catlady (Rita Prince Winston)) Date: Mon, 09 Jan 2006 03:39:51 -0000 Subject: RatSpy/Ch7summary/VeelaGrandma/Crystallized/BlaiseMum/HagridPals/ViktorSnape Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146129 PJ midnightowl wrote in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/145750 : << Well, since Peter was the first to find Voldermort after escaping the Shrieking Shack, I believe he was able to give LV much more than even Bertha Jorgenson on a wide range of things that had happened since GH. He'd have been present for family discussions and possibly even Order meetings! Who watches what they say in front of their pets? Oddly enough though, none of the adults in the WW so much as mention this potential disaster. >> Which Order members have grasped what/who Scabbers was? Not Molly: when she proclaims that she must give Ron a reward for being chosen Prefect, she suggests various things including "or a new rat, you always liked Scabbers". Maybe all the Weasleys thought that Ron's tail tale that Scabbers had been Pettigrew in disguise all along was some kind of hysterical delusion, and have since then forgotten about it. Sirius and Remus knew that Scabbers was Wormtail was Peter, and Remus knew that Scabbers had been Ron's pet, but maybe it didn't occur to either of them that Scabbers would have overheard anything important in the Weasley household. He wouldn't have overheard Order meetings, as the Order didn't reconstitute until a whole year (book) after Peter escaped. Dumbledore was told about Scabbers/Wormtail/Peter at the end of PoA, and he should have known that Arthur is the type to bring excellent classified gossip home from the office. But he also is famous for not telling anyone any information. Anita akh summarized chapter 7 in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/145765 including: << Luna presumes he???s been attacked by a Wrackspurt, an invisible creature that floats through one???s ear into one???s brain, making it all fuzzy. As Luna bats off imagined Wrackspurts,Harry and Neville exchange a look and hastily change the subject. >> I dunno why Luna is given the line about Wrackspurts, when they are quite obviously real, at least based on my experience. << As Slughorn chats with each student, Harry???s suspicions are confirmed: each has a famous or well-connected relative, except for Harry and Ginny. >> Harry ALSO has famous parents; it's just that they're dead. << [Ginny] explains that she hexed Zacharias Smith after he irritated her by badgering her with questions about the Ministry of Magic incident. >> Just as Pensieve!Lily said to/of Pensieve!James: "walking down corridors and hexing anyone who annoys you just because you can". 3rdTwin!Ginny seems to be more like James than like Lily. << [Draco] assures Harry he didn???t hear anything important, but still takes the opportunity to stomp in Harry???s face and cover him again with the cloak, thus making Harry both immobile and invisible. >> It struck me on first reading that this is Harry's come-up-ance for the six against three (DA versus Draco and Crabbengoyle) on the Hogwarts Express at the end of OoP, especially the DA leaving them on the floor of the train struck down by all those curses versus Draco leaving Harry on the floor of the train. << 8. As we learn about each student???s connections during Slughorn???s luncheon party, whose story, if any, do you suppose will prove to be important in book 7? >> Damocles Belby's. There must have been a reason he invented the Wolfsbane Potion. Allie wrote in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/145849 : << Fleur's grandmother is/was a Veela, that means her mother is half Veela >> Unless the Veela grandmother is her father's mother instead of her mother's mother. Harry say Fleur's at the event before the Third Task, when the families came to greet the Champions: "On the other side of the room, Fleur was jabbering away in French to her mother. Fleur???s little sister, Gabrielle, was holding her mother???s hand." The description doesn't sound as if the mother had even middle-aged remnants of Veela beauty. Meri wondered in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/145875 : << what in the world crystalized pinneapple is... >> I've been assuming it is dried pineapple chunks coated in sugar, like crystallized ginger. I believe that 'crystallized' is a reference to the sugar, like the way sugar forms rock candy. Carol wrote in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/145938 : << And Blaise, whose mother appears to be a "black widow" in the sense of a spider who kills her mates (no connection with her race), >> We don't know which of Blaise's parents, mother or father, was black. Maybe both were, but it seems unlikely that all *seven* rich and gullible wizards who married the beautiful widow were black... For all I know, Blaise might the child from an eighth husband whom she married for love. Valky wrote in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/145987 : << Hagrid is a lonely outcast, how does his emotional needs for companionship become some ploy of extra privilege. It's not like other students were likely to take him up on his offer of tea. >> Remember in GoF, when Rita Skeeter outed Hagrid as half-giant and he hid in his house and Dumbledore tried to talk him out of it? "I have shown you the letters from the countless parents who remember you from their own days here, telling me in no uncertain terms that, if I sacked you, they would have something to say about it ???" That sound like a person who always has many friends about the students, rather than like a lonely outcast. skatinglibrarian wrote in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/146116 : << JKR tends to have family groups bear a striking resemblence to one another... the Weasley, the Potters, the Blacks, the RIddles etc. Who looks like Snape ? so far the only one I've spotted that even comes close is Victor Krum. Round shouldered, sallow, large nose, a grumpy git. >> The scene in GoF from which I have already quoted a reference to Fleur's mother also provides Viktor with a father who looks like him, possibly as a deliberate attempt to quash 'Viktor Snape' theories: "Viktor Krum was over in a corner, conversing with his dark-haired mother and father in rapid Bulgarian. He had inherited his father???s hooked nose." << About the right age for what I have in mind. >> In this case, 'about' isn't good enough. Snape was in the same year as James and Lily. James and Lily were 20 according to the Lexicon (or 22 according to me) when Harry was born. Viktor is 18 at the beginning of GoF (per Ron) when Harry has just turned 14, so Viktor is 4 to 5 years older than Harry. Snape became a father when he was 15 or 16 years old? From elfundeb at gmail.com Mon Jan 9 04:02:37 2006 From: elfundeb at gmail.com (elfundeb) Date: Sun, 8 Jan 2006 23:02:37 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Let's talk about Lupin In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <80f25c3a0601082002o40bbfed6qf7e52f36cdd5daa8@mail.gmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 146130 Marianne: > Lupin struck me as "off" in HBP, compared to the way he felt to me > from previous books. That whole speech at the Burrow at Christmas > about how he neither likes nor dislikes Snape, his outing as a > werewolf would have happened anyway - why blame Snape, he (Lupin) > must be grateful for any crumbs that fall his way, etc. It was as > if he was chanting these things in his head to convince himself > they were true. His whole manner of speech struck me as overly > formal, almost stilted. Debbie: Did you think Lupin was "off" from a characterization perspective, or "off" from his character in previous books? I see Lupin as very fatalistic about his situation; he expects to get the dregs, and he goes to great lengths to convince himself that he should simply accept the way things are. I felt that the Lupin we saw in HBP probably reflected the survival tactics he used to deal with all those years of isolation and loneliness. In contrast, next to the MWPP days, POA and OOP were the best times of his adult life -- first as a member of the Hogwarts teaching staff, and in OOP he could hang out at Grimmauld Place with Sirius and the other Order members. After the death of Sirius, he reverted to his usal coping mechanisms, which involved a good dose of mental self-flagellation. Taking on the job of interfacing with the other werewolves is all of a piece with that kind of behavior. His appearance at the end of OOP ("his face pale, his hair greying, a long and threadbare overcoat covering a shabby jumper and trousers") strongly suggest the description JKR gives when we first see him on the train in POA, when he has been living as an outcast for many years. So, in my view, Lupin was "off" only if we're comparing him to the good days. These are not good days for him. Marianne: > But, to get to the Tonks thing, I agree, I felt it came out of > left field. It felt tacked on to me, as if JKR suddenly decided > not only to pair these two off, but to use this as another facet > of the theme of obsessive love, but an obsessive love that turns > out okay. Debbie: I can't say I wasn't surprised (though perhaps I shouldn't have been, as the book seemed to be oozing love potions), but for me the pieces seemed to fall into place. They certainly had plenty of time to get to know one another in OOP, since Tonks seemed to hang out at 12GP almost as much as Lupin did. And they did get left mysteriously in Hogsmeade alone together when they escorted Harry & co. back to Hogwarts after Christmas. Lupin is about the last character in all of HP to express his feelings. For him to have done so would have been wholly out of character. So, I think JKR tried to do it by focusing on the *reasons* Lupin gives, and hoping the readers would focus on the absence of "I don't return your feelings" on his list as inferring that wasn't the issue. I'll readily admit, though, that it was too subtle and left a lot of readers scratching their heads. (We all have those moments; it took me a long time to accept that Sirius wasn't going to double-cross Harry when he and Buckbeak rescued him in POA.) Marianne: Here she is, browbeating the man she is supposedly in > love with, who is currently reeling from the death of the person > who gave him more opportunities to succeed in life, despite being > a werewolf, than anyone else. She tries to force him to address > their relationship, or lack of it, at this very emotional moment, > in front of a bunch of other people. Now, maybe we're supposed to > read this as Tonks desperately making a final, heartfelt plea to > Remus to make his see she truly loves him. My reaction to her > was "What part of "no" don't you understand?" Debbie: I read Tonks' dejection/obsession as relating to the *reason* for Lupin's rejection rather than the fact of rejection. The reasons Lupin gives for his prior rejection have nothing to do with his feelings; his feelings are addressed through subtext, which I thought was clear. Too old, too poor, too dangerous. She is despondent because she has offered him a gift and he has rejected it because he has convinced himself that he doesn't deserve it. Lupin is about the last character in all of HP to express his feelings. For him to have done so would have been wholly out of character. So, I think JKR tried to do it by focusing on the *reasons* Lupin gives, and hoping the readers would focus on the absence of "I don't return your feelings" on his list as inferring that wasn't the issue. I'll readily admit, though, that it was too subtle and left a lot of readers scratching their heads. (We all have those moments; it took me a long time to accept that Sirius wasn't going to double-cross Harry when he and Buckbeak rescued him in POA.) Marianne: > We had examples of others suffering an unhealthy sort of love or > infatuation, and acting on it (Merope). We had the description of > the amortentia potion. We had the twins selling some sort of love > potion. We had Romilda, the fan-girl, trying to slip something to > Harry, and inadvertently affecting Ron. Is Tonks' affection for > Remus real, or another example of infatuation? Or is it an example > of love that may appear obsessive to some readers, but really > isn't? The jury is still out for me. Debbie: I thought it was real, but overplayed. Magda: It's not the shipping I mind but rather the quality of the cargo. Ron turned into a total doofus, Hermoine into a shrew, Harry's roaring monster gave me the giggles and Ginny unleashed her inner bitch. Not sure it made young love look very attractive. Personally I think that if JKR has any ambitions to be a romance writer, a sympathetic but firm editor needs to sit her down for a long chat. Debbie: Agree again. JKR is at her best when she plays the shipping for laughs, as she did with the Yule Ball episode. I thought the best "shipping" moment of HBP was Love Potioned!Ron, because it was laugh-out-loud funny. Most of the rest could have been cleared out of the book and I wouldn't have noticed. But despite the surprise, Lupin/Tonks *worked* for me, somehow. Perhaps because they are adults, or because I empathize with Lupin. Debbie who wanted to respond to other posts but has run out of time [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Mon Jan 9 04:40:09 2006 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Mon, 09 Jan 2006 04:40:09 -0000 Subject: Let's talk about Lupin In-Reply-To: <80f25c3a0601082002o40bbfed6qf7e52f36cdd5daa8@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146131 Debbie wrote: > Did you think Lupin was "off" from a characterization perspective, or "off" from his character in previous books? I see Lupin as very fatalistic about his situation; he expects to get the dregs, and he goes to great lengths to convince himself that he should simply accept the way things are. I felt that the Lupin we saw in HBP probably reflected the survival tactics he used to deal with all those years of isolation and loneliness. In contrast, next to the MWPP days, POA and OOP were the best times of his adult life -- first as a member of the Hogwarts teaching staff, and in OOP he could hang out at Grimmauld Place with Sirius and the other Order members. > > After the death of Sirius, he reverted to his usal coping mechanisms, which involved a good dose of mental self-flagellation. His appearance at the end of OOP ("his face pale, his hair > greying, a long and threadbare overcoat covering a shabby jumper and > trousers") strongly suggest the description JKR gives when we first see him on the train in POA, when he has been living as an outcast for many years. > So, in my view, Lupin was "off" only if we're comparing him to the good days. These are not good days for him. Carol responds: I agree. He's unemployed, dirt poor, and grieving for Sirius (possibly feeling some share of guilt for his death if he blames himself for Peter's escape, which led directly to the restoration of Voldemort and indirectly to events in the MoM. But there's another factor that made the Hogwarts much more bearable, even enjoyable (not counting whatever pleasure he received from teaching and from helping Harry while he was also busy hiding his secrets)--the Wolfsbane Potion, which Severus Snape "made and made perfectly," which saved him from the mental and physical agony of his monthly transformations (though not from the transformations themselves). When Lupin expresses gratitude to the absent Snape for brewing the potion (in the "I neither like nor dislike Severus" scene), I believe that he's speaking the truth. For ten months out of the thirty-some years that he's been undergoing these transformations, he had rest and sleep rather than torment during the twenty-four hours or so per month when he was in werewolf form. *That's* why he looks grey as well as tattered now. His face is aging and his hair is graying from his suffering. I hope that this link with Snape, along with the common bond of having suffered terribly from the DADA curse, will lead to some sort of reconciliation (if that's the right word for men who were never really friends) between Snape and Lupin in Book 7. Lupin seems like the person most likely to understand how the DADA curse could have led to the UV and trapped Snape into doing something he didn't want to do. I realize that this is an emotional reaction, a hope, not a theory, but I would love to see them develop an understanding that enabled Snape to help Harry, surreptitiously or openly. Knowing Lupin and his penchant for secrecy, it would probably be surreptitiously. Carol, delighted to see that JKR (or at least her website) is wishing Severus Snape a happy birthday (Fictional character or no, I wish him a day of peace and a respite from remorse, happiness being out of the question after HBP.) From tonks_op at yahoo.com Mon Jan 9 05:31:39 2006 From: tonks_op at yahoo.com (Tonks) Date: Mon, 09 Jan 2006 05:31:39 -0000 Subject: Let's talk about Lupin In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146132 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "justcarol67" wrote: > > I hope that this link with Snape, along with the common bond of having suffered terribly from the DADA curse, will lead to some sort of reconciliation (if that's the right word for men who were never really friends) between Snape and Lupin in Book 7. Lupin seems like the person most likely to understand how the DADA curse could have led to the UV and trapped Snape into doing something he didn't want to do. I realize that this is an emotional reaction, a hope, not a theory, but I would love to see them develop an understanding that enabled Snape to help Harry, surreptitiously or openly. Knowing Lupin and his penchant for secrecy, it would probably be surreptitiously. Tonks here: I too would like to see Snape and Lupin working together. Maybe they can see what they have in common. They are both outcast, both working for the Order in places and situations that they would rather not be in. If anyone could understand Snape it would be Lupin who is a man of great compassion and empathy. I could see some sort of bond between them for the good of the cause. I don't think that Snape hates Lupin. He still hates James and Sirius yes, but I am not sure if that extends to Lupin now that they are both adults. Also wishing Snape a Happy Birthday, poor man. Maybe Narcissa will bake him a cake. Tonks_op Happy to be with Lupin. I always liked older men. ;-) From ellecain at yahoo.com.au Mon Jan 9 06:59:14 2006 From: ellecain at yahoo.com.au (ellecain) Date: Mon, 09 Jan 2006 06:59:14 -0000 Subject: Real child abuse/ Kantian typo In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146133 > > Betsy Hp: > > I'm really uncomfortable with that sort of philosophy. Rather than > > using rules fairly applied to everybody, some rules are made for > > one sort of person and other rules are made for another sort. So, > > Draco deserves to be physically tortured because of who he is. But > > Neville should never be challanged because of who he is. Hagrid is > > allowed to physically endanger his students. Snape is not allowed > > to emotionally endanger his. > Nora: > Someone posted something not long ago in response to this statement > or one like it bringing up Kant, but I think they typoed/got it off > incomplete, so the search doesn't find it. (Chocolate to anyone who > finds it for me, because I like to cite things?) Elyse: Erm... I guess that would be me. I wrote a response where it was supposed to be Kantian but I left out the K by mistake. Aaargh....I tried so hard to eliminate my post of all typos but there must be a jinx on my fingers. The only reason I brought up Kant was because of a comment on HPfGU Fantastic Posts that goes "Kant is arguably the Snapiest philosopher" ,one that I could never comprehend. Can anyone accept my challenge to prove to me that Snape's thinking goes along the lines of Kantian philosophy? The link to my post is here: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/145870 if anyone wants to read it. (I cant believe someone read it and remembered it not to mention decoding the typos) Elyse, eating Nora's chocolate... From Nanagose at aol.com Mon Jan 9 07:53:22 2006 From: Nanagose at aol.com (spotsgal) Date: Mon, 09 Jan 2006 07:53:22 -0000 Subject: /ESE!lupin questions (long) In-Reply-To: <00a801c614c8$8b0e1b10$0400a8c0@pensive> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146134 > Sherry now: > i think the answer to how Sirius and Lupin knew the prophecy is so > obvious and easy to understand. I believe Alla mentioned it last > night, but i will again. i am sure that James and Lily would have > told Sirius about the prophecy. possibly Lupin as well. We don't > know if the potters suspected Lupin, only that Sirius did. Christina: You're absolutely right; even if the Potters did suspect Lupin, once Voldemort's special interest in the Potters surfaced, it probably took the Order a little while to even suspect a traitor. In that amount of time, the Potters would be hopping from place to place without yet realizing that somebody within the Order was betraying them. > > Pippin: > > I think at the heart of things is a choice Harry will make: to > > recognize that a person he likes as much as Lupin could fall into > > evil, along with a choice to recognize that a person he hates as > > much as Snape could turn to good. > Christina: > I have similar thoughts to yours, but I think that Harry must learn > that even people who are nice can do bad things, while people who > are mean can do good things. Snape comes in as an example for the > latter (IMO), while examples from the former include pretty much all > of our good guys (James comes to mind as a biggie). > sherry now: > I don't think Harry needs to learn that lesson again. He's already > been betrayed by people he liked or trusted. Christina: Precisely. There's no need to belabor the point just to torture Harry a bit more. > Sherry: > On a purely emotional level, i can't stand the idea of Harry's last > connection to his parents and Sirius turning out to be evil. Christina: I couldn't agree more, but I think there are also huge practical reasons why Good!Lupin is important. Lupin is Harry's last remaining link to his parents, like you said. He has shown a willingness to talk about James, and when he tells Harry about his father in HBP, it actually seems to cheer Lupin up. The fact that there's quite a bit of information missing about the Potters (particularly Lily), and JKR's brush-aside of Lupin in HBP leads me to suspect that it'll be Lupin that will fill in the details that Harry needs to know. Unless some mysterious best friend of Lily's comes out of the woodwork at the eleventh hour, Lupin is probably the one still alive who knew her best (not counting possibly Peter or Snape, but they aren't in any position to impart information of that sort to Harry). Lupin is somebody that Harry likes and trusts. He is also accessible to Harry. ESE!Lupin basically renders this connection useless, and destroys the most direct way for Harry to learn about his parents. The book can't be 2,000 pages. Harry has to get the information he needs as fast as possible. Also, Sirius. JKR keeps telling us that we'll learn more about Sirius-related things (she's even promised to tell us what's happened to his motorbike). The mirror will probably return, and if Regulus Black is RAB, then Sirius will play a heavy (if absent) role in Book 7. Who, that is still alive, had a close relationship with Sirius? Lupin, of course! He is a virtual fountain of information. Not to mention that Lupin is, like Hermione, an unbiased, fair figure. If Snape is DDM, then somebody has to convince Harry to trust him again. He's also an extremely talented wizard and a cool head in a fight. If Harry decides to go to Godric's Hollow, I'd say that Lupin would also be the perfect person to go with him. Thematically, Lupin and Harry are very similar, and it would be nice to see them lay their ghosts to rest together. Again, book seven has a definite length, and JKR has a *ton* of plotlines to wrap up. I just don't think there's enough time to throw Lupin into the bad guy pot. We already have the is-he-good/is-he-bad character in Snape; I honestly don't think we'll get blindsided by yet another person popping up ESE. > Sherry: > When the war is over and Voldemort vanquished, i want Harry to be > able to listen to Marauder stories and stories of his parents life > together, his months of life before Voldemort killed his parents. > For even deeper emotional reasons, because of the resonance with > which the marauders story touched my heart, I want there to be one > marauder still standing at the end. Standing and happy at last, > standing for James and lily and Sirius. Harry needs that, i think. > he doesn't need anymore betrayals. Christina: I love the story of the Marauders too, but I've always thought that all of James's contemporaries (Peter, Snape, and Lupin are left) would have to die in order to bring the story to a smooth close. There is so much emphasis on the past that I've always felt that each person from the previous generation needs to serve their purpose and then die, so that Harry's generation can emerge and stand on its own. I've always liked the idea of *Harry* being the last Marauder standing. However, really thinking about Lupin dying makes me sniffly, so maybe I'll convert to your side. With the whole Lupin/Tonks storyline in HBP, I now doubt JKR will kill him off anyway. And if anybody deserves a spot of happiness in the wizarding world, it's Lupin. And, what are the odds that there were TWO traitors among the Marauders? I mean, please. Half of the group betrayed the good side? In my mind, the traitor!Marauder storyling is a been-there-done-that. Christina From finwitch at yahoo.com Mon Jan 9 08:47:46 2006 From: finwitch at yahoo.com (finwitch) Date: Mon, 09 Jan 2006 08:47:46 -0000 Subject: Special treatment - yes or no/Rules In-Reply-To: <009401c613ca$f4325a60$14b2a8c0@rechnerchen> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146135 "Miles": > > Yes, sometimes it really is necessary to break the law or a rule to do the > RIGHT thing. But even then you have to take the responsibility for it, > because your decision can destabilise the society you live in. Finwitch: I agree. I do believe that it is more important to do what is right than to obey rules/orders. Which, of course, does not mean that rules are unimportant. It's just that in case of say Harry standing up for Neville at age eleven in PS when Draco took the Remembrall despite being told not to move. You know, Harry *did* expect a punishment - but instead, he got himself into the team. And then as he later says 'it's really thanks to Malfoy I got it.' And Hermione snorts about 'reward for breaking rules.' She did not see that Harry was defending Neville against a bully which is where this reward came from IMO. If only one school-child would follow Harry's example in that - defend a schoolmate - I'd say the world would be a better place. Finwitch From Aisbelmon at hotmail.com Mon Jan 9 10:03:53 2006 From: Aisbelmon at hotmail.com (M.Clifford) Date: Mon, 09 Jan 2006 10:03:53 -0000 Subject: Special treatment - yes or no/Rules In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146136 Magpie: > Point taking and giving is completely arbitrary and the > reasons given for their points at the end certainly qualify. I > (and others) have said that allowing the hall to be decorated in > Slytherin banners so that they could be taken down and replaced > a dramatic move to give a surprise to Harry unnecessarily singled > was out Slytherin and would undoubtedly have annoyed all the kids > in that house. I think Dumbledore just wanted to make his points a > surprise which involved a big PSYCH to Slytherin. Valky: And it is on that particular point which I disagree. Winding us back to my original point, I am saying that Dumbledore did not save his 'surprise' in order to revere Harry or Gryffindor House above Slytherin (neither deliberately nor indavertantly because I am losing track of whose arguing which, now :P) but that the presentation of the House Points at the end of the book fits within the context of the PS/SS story, where - - we see Slytherin Members being petty, sneaky and unfair in relation to the House Points competition (House Points are not so arbitrary either, they are taken for rulebreaking and they are awarded for winning the Quidditch games). - and not a one of the three other houses can come close to Slytherin's points accumulation at the end of the year, - it had been that way for many years. and put simply, the Slytherin creed of 'anything goes as long as Slytherin wins' comes through quite clearly in the story as the oppressor of everyone else. This is especially shown through the eyes of the key protagonist 'Harry' but it is a small book with distinctly 'children's' flavour, even so the other houses lose too, they lose to a seemingly irrepressable force whose only goal is to win. The Trio's goal under the trapdoor has nothing to do with gaining points, they set out to do something truly virtuous, with no thought of the reward. The juxtaposition of these points against those of the house that seeks only the reward therefore is how I see Dumbledore's actions in the end of the story. Not as a criticism of the Slytherin House, but as the demonstration of an example for all of Hogwarts. Slytherins colours are up although everyone knows what the trio did, even with such events going on in Hogwarts nobody questions the superiority of the Slytherin reasoning of battling amongst each other for House Points which has dominated Hogwarts so long. Except Dumbledore. The singling out of Slytherin was not unnecessary, it was natural, in such a Hogwarts, Slytherin naturally flourishes. > Valky: > I am not sure how to answer that. I don't understand what authority > you have that on, Magpie. There *is* a subplot of Slytherins > playing unfairly in the House cup challenge. > > Magpie: > It is canon that Snape takes points away from Gryffindor for petty > things sometimes and that we never see him take away points (or > give points, that I remember) to his own house. It's also canon > that in later years Slytherin is able to lose the cup despite > Dumbledore not adding points at the last minute without Snape > changing. Valky: On the first point, and for the benefit of everyone who has asked me to recall my canon examples, I recall Snape giving some House points to a Slytherin Potions student, and from the perspective we are given it seems like an open display of house favouritism. I recall it happening only on one occasion, but I cannot find it in the PS/SS chapters so perhaps it is a later book. OTOH we do not see him taking away House Points from Slytherins when he clearly should have done on numerous occasions and I see you have agreed to that, Magpie. I also recall some examples of him being unwilling to give Hermione point recognition for outstanding work, and of course we all agree that he takes points from Harry at every opportunity, fair or unfair. On the second point you made Magpie, which is indeed a good point, I can only say I speculate that we are perhaps supposed to take into account what changes may have come in the mindset of Hogwarts students as a result of the Trio's actions in the first book. In that, I mean that overall the spirits of the students from other Houses were lifted by the experience, and faith in striving for some greater good rather than battling to keep/gain House points, was restored in Hogwarts. In this case a teacher like Snape would be up against it, whereas previously his abuse of power would have seemed to be an ultimate force in a students life, and the students would have felt helpless against it, after Dumbledore's demonstration Snape's pettiness with points would have had much less an effect on the students, that power to deflate the students of other houses lost to him. Of course you have to buy my first premise on what was the point of shaming Slytherin's win in PS/SS in order to agree with that, but FWIW there is my explanation. Magpie: > Draco may have told on Harry and tempted him to break the > rules so he'd get caught but Harry's points lost for being out of > bed are perfectly fair if he is out of bed. Valky: LOL ahh that's exactly what I mean by saying that this became an ultimate power that could dampen the spirits of the students, you're right, Slytherin is right. Those points are perfectly fair to be taken. This is the environment in which Slytherin thrives, because that is what Slytherin is always mindful of, the opportunity, the points, the prime objective. This is not to say the rules should not be followed, but rather that making this dogmatic consistency the ultimate yardstick of virtue can only benefit the dogmatic house. Hence the reason that they dominated the House Cup for seven years. My point is that Dumbledore set out to counterbalance this in the end of PS/SS. He recognised Slytherins efforts, a recognition of their clear ability to thrive in the previous dogmatic environment, and then he set out to change that environment, to balance it with the admission of a new set of virtues in to the equation. Magpie: > And I'm sure every single student mutters about how students in > other houses don't get points taken away as much as their house > does. Gryffindor always sees itself as the most virtuous and the > most victimized by unfair calls. That's not an objective > observation. Valky: We will have to agree to disagree here, because I most unequivocally believe that Slytherins in PS/SS victimised Gryffindors and enjoyed the advantage of the oppression of Gryffindor Virtues quite happily. Valky From annemehr at yahoo.com Mon Jan 9 13:18:40 2006 From: annemehr at yahoo.com (annemehr) Date: Mon, 09 Jan 2006 13:18:40 -0000 Subject: /ESE!lupin questions (long) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146137 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "spotsgal" wrote: > > > Sherry now: > > i think the answer to how Sirius and Lupin knew the prophecy is so > > obvious and easy to understand. I believe Alla mentioned it last > > night, but i will again. i am sure that James and Lily would have > > told Sirius about the prophecy. possibly Lupin as well. We don't > > know if the potters suspected Lupin, only that Sirius did. > > Christina: > > You're absolutely right; even if the Potters did suspect Lupin, once > Voldemort's special interest in the Potters surfaced, it probably took > the Order a little while to even suspect a traitor. In that amount of > time, the Potters would be hopping from place to place without yet > realizing that somebody within the Order was betraying them. Annemehr: There may have been plenty of time for James to have told all the Marauders. In PoA, Sirius said Peter had been passing information to Voldemort "for a year." Since Harry was fifteen months old when Lily and James were killed, that would mean that for a while after Harry was born, there was no traitor suspected amongst them. The prophecy itself was made some months before Harry's birth. So there was plenty of *time* for Dumbledore to tell the Potters of the prophecy, and the Potters to pass the news on to Sirius, Lupin, and Peter while the Marauders were still quite intact. I have really no doubt that James would have told his friends about the prophecy. The only questions remaining are: at what point did Dumbledore realise that Lily and James fit (unfortunately, the "thrice defied" clause makes it completely uncertain), and how closed-mouthed was Dumbledore about it? Annemehr From zarleycat at sbcglobal.net Mon Jan 9 13:26:55 2006 From: zarleycat at sbcglobal.net (kiricat4001) Date: Mon, 09 Jan 2006 13:26:55 -0000 Subject: Let's talk about Lupin In-Reply-To: <80f25c3a0601082002o40bbfed6qf7e52f36cdd5daa8@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146138 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, elfundeb wrote: >> Did you think Lupin was "off" from a characterization perspective, or "off" > from his character in previous books? I see Lupin as very fatalistic about > his situation; he expects to get the dregs, and he goes to great lengths to > convince himself that he should simply accept the way things are. I felt > that the Lupin we saw in HBP probably reflected the survival tactics he used > to deal with all those years of isolation and loneliness. In contrast, next > to the MWPP days, POA and OOP were the best times of his adult life -- first > as a member of the Hogwarts teaching staff, and in OOP he could hang out at > Grimmauld Place with Sirius and the other Order members. Marianne: But, Lupin is still in contact with other Order members. He knows his werewolf assignment is not a sentence for the rest of his life, even though he sounds bitter about it to Harry. His coping mechanisms as you've described them would make more sense to me if Lupin knew that, indeed, this was to be his life from now on- stuck with the werewolves forever. I'd be more likely to attribute his "offness" in HBP to grief over Sirius, feeling bad because he can't make Tonks back off without hurting her feelings, and dread because he's again involved in the kind of guerilla war he fought in once before, and he's once again losing people he cares about. But, as we don't hear him say any of this, it's pure speculation on my part. I see your point with regards to Lupin's fatalism and that he may be reverting to ingrained coping mechanisms. However, this, too then strikes a wrong note. If we assume that Lupin spent his days in isolation and loneliness after the Potters' deaths, on the edges of society, living hand to mouth, shut off from "normal" people, how do we account for the active, sympahtetic, affable, confident DADA Professor? Where do those social skills come from? Maybe Lupin is simply a really good actor who has an innate gift for teaching that he can turn on like a light switch after years of isolation. Or maybe, even though he could not keep jobs long-term once people found out about him, he was not quite so isolated and ostracized. You and I are both speculating about Lupin's life, and certainly you could be right on the money. We're probably on the same scale, just at different points along it. Debbie: > After the death of Sirius, he reverted to his usal coping mechanisms, which > involved a good dose of mental self-flagellation. Taking on the job of > interfacing with the other werewolves is all of a piece with that kind of > behavior. Marianne: I'm not sure what you mean by this. Are you saying he took on the werewolf spying job because it fit in with his innate feelings of "this is all I'm good for/I deserve no better"? It seems to me that DD asked him, as an Order member, to do this because he'd be the most believable person. And, Remus, being a good soldier, accepts his assignment. > Marianne: > > But, to get to the Tonks thing, I agree, I felt it came out of > > left field. It felt tacked on to me, as if JKR suddenly decided > > not only to pair these two off, but to use this as another facet > > of the theme of obsessive love, but an obsessive love that turns > > out okay. Debbie: > I read Tonks' dejection/obsession as relating to the *reason* for Lupin's > rejection rather than the fact of rejection. The reasons Lupin gives for > his prior rejection have nothing to do with his feelings; his feelings are > addressed through subtext, which I thought was clear. Too old, too poor, > too dangerous. She is despondent because she has offered him a gift and he > has rejected it because he has convinced himself that he doesn't deserve > it. Marianne: I guess the subtext was too subterranean for me to see ;-). Your earlier point about Lupin not being one to open up about his feelings is well-taken. However, that's a double-edged sword. >From my perspective, he doesn't want to say outright that he's not interested because he doesn't want to hurt Tonks by that kind of rejection. He particularly doesn't want to say something like that during the Hospital scene because then he'd be openly rejecting her in front of an audience. Instead, he gives her a laundry list of reasons why he's unsuitable, which gives her the option of walking away, and placing the onus for this relationship not working on him. I guess I'm not convinced that Lupin is suffering under the burden of deciding that he's not deserving of being loved. However, should the two be shown as a couple in Book 7, I'll be forced to believe it. Marianne From betsyfallon at hotmail.com Mon Jan 9 13:36:07 2006 From: betsyfallon at hotmail.com (betsy fallon) Date: Mon, 09 Jan 2006 13:36:07 -0000 Subject: Horcrux? Sorting Hat? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146139 Please forgive me if this has been mentioned before and I do not have my books with me. I believe it is in Book 6 when it was stated that the only thing left of Godric Gryffindor's at Hogwarts is his sword. I believe that the sorting hat also belonged to him. Remember when in one of the sorting ceremonies, the song was telling the tale of how it was created. It stated that Gryffindor pulled the hat from his head, created the sorting hat to be able select students for their houses. Is it possible that the sorting hat is a horcrux? Or just a prized possession for The Dark Lord to to covet? betsyfallon From Koinonia2 at hotmail.com Mon Jan 9 13:49:54 2006 From: Koinonia2 at hotmail.com (koinonia02) Date: Mon, 09 Jan 2006 13:49:54 -0000 Subject: Horcrux? Sorting Hat? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146140 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Message 146139 "betsy fallon" wrote: > Is it possible that the sorting hat is a horcrux? Or just a prized > possession for The Dark Lord to to covet? "K": Hi Betsy. JKR answered that question on her website. ------------------------------------------------------------------- The Sorting Hat is a Horcrux No, it isn't. Horcruxes do not draw attention to themselves by singing songs in front of large audiences. http://www.jkrowling.com/textonly/en/rumours_view.cfm?id=43 From stevejjen at earthlink.net Mon Jan 9 14:34:19 2006 From: stevejjen at earthlink.net (Jen Reese) Date: Mon, 09 Jan 2006 14:34:19 -0000 Subject: Harry and Love (Special treatment of Harry ) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146141 Quick_Silver > You've wrote several amazing posts. However I disagree with the > idea that Harry must let go of habits/traits/whatever else so that > he can be filled with "love power." I'm not saying that he > shouldn't let go of those trait because he must definitely should. > It just that I feel that "love" is either Harry's must overrated > ability or his most misunderstood one. The problem, from my point > of view, is that I don't have a handle on what exactly Harry's > love ability is supposed to be. Jen: Harry's love is what *protects* him from Voldemort. Dumbledore said: "You are protected in short by your ability to love! The only protection that can possibly work against the lure of power like Voldemort's." (Horcrux chap., p. 477, Bloomsbury) I haven't gotten universal appeal or actually any support for the idea that Voldemort will use Harry's hatred of Snape against him in Book 7, tempting him into a situation where he must choose whether to hurt Snape or show him mercy, but I do think Dumbledore's words presage this idea. It's not that Harry has to let go of all his negative traits to let the power of his love come forth, rather that hatred erodes his protection against Voldemort's manipulations. Quick_Silver: > That is what makes Harry different Voldemort who can't really love > not by the definition JK seems to be working with anyway. So > basically I don't work on the assumption that Harry's abilities to > love is {not} special compared to Hermione's, Ron's, Neville's, > Draco's, etc but that it is special compared to Voldemort's. Jen: I agree with this statement wholeheartedly. I think what makes Harry different from the rest is the weapons Voldemort keeps handing him. But what makes him amazing in Dumbledore's eyes is how he could be 'tainted' by Voldemort from the curse that failed and all that has happened since, and never lose his ability to love or succumb to the lure of the dark arts. Others who started with much more than Harry, and who have never had a direct link with the darkest wizard in a century, have failed in this respect. Jen From monalila662 at earthlink.net Mon Jan 9 14:41:51 2006 From: monalila662 at earthlink.net (dillgravy) Date: Mon, 09 Jan 2006 14:41:51 -0000 Subject: Moaning Myrtle was a Mudblood... Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146142 Sounds like a deranged nursery rhyme, but anyway... Has anyone explored theories on the Draco/Moaning Myrtle thing. I realize that dear Draco (said with honest loathing) is under a lot of stress (poor thing-- again, sarcastic tone) but why would he cry and confess to a (he said it, not me) filthy little mudblood. He does know that Myrtle isn't pureblood. It would be against everything that little git stands for to be befriending a mudblood ghost--- regardess of whether or not he was going to carry out Voldemort's plan. From Aisbelmon at hotmail.com Mon Jan 9 16:14:34 2006 From: Aisbelmon at hotmail.com (M.Clifford) Date: Mon, 09 Jan 2006 16:14:34 -0000 Subject: Moaning Myrtle was a Mudblood... In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146143 Dillgravy wrote: > > Sounds like a deranged nursery rhyme, but anyway... > Has anyone explored theories on the Draco/Moaning Myrtle thing. He does know > that Myrtle isn't pureblood. It would be against everything that > little git stands for to be befriending a mudblood ghost--- Valky: Agreed, Dillgravy :) And IMNSHO all the evidence leads compellingly toward the notion that dear Draco's perefect 'pure' blood, which was always, to him, a badge of pre-eminent entitlement and the pillar of his effluent and privileged existence, has been tainted. There are a couple of theories on this, and I have bent my ear to both the Vampire!Draco theory and the Werewolf!Draco theory. There could be a better one, I would love to hear it :) One thing that strikes me as promising about a bitten Draco theory is that his has potential to explain such strange behaviours in Draco in HBP such as suddenly turning to the counsel of Moaning Myrtle, the ghost of an inferior being to Draco whom, only a few years earlier, would have been seen by him as a deserving victim of 'ethnic cleansing'. If Draco's precious blood has been tainted, if he can no longer rely on his claim to purity as the beacon, lighting his life's purpose, what then? What do those who are *not* pure live for? Draco wouldn't know, he was never told anything but that they did not deserve life, he was raised to believe that anything or anyone who possessed anything less than a pure wizards blood had no purpose in life, so what then, when that purposeless, condemned creature, was him? If Draco was in this frame of mind, if he had been sent into a chaotic tail-spin of existential depression due to a loss of his purity, which he had been raised to treasure above all else, then I would say that approaching Moaning Myrtle would demonstrated either his will to live on, or his death wish. One or the other, depending how you look at it. First Moaning Myrtle was a mudblood, she once lived as a Mudblood. Myrtle, I would suppose, might be a source of some reassurance that Draco might seek, if he were suddenly slighted by an inability to qualify his own existence. Myrtle once lived, and sure as heck didn't want to die, so how did she qualify her existence, what made her go on living despite 'knowing' that she was disenfranchised of it. Looked at that way, we could say that Draco wanted to live, in spite of the nagging of his psychological programme, habitually reminding him of his old will to deny life to anything that is not pure. Or we could look at it the pessimistic way and point out that Myrtle died a profoundly depressed young woman, and that for fifty years she laid, curled up in a toilet bowl, perfecting her torment and misery. We can note that Myrtle would love nothing more than for a young man to accept her offer of eternal apathetic sadness, together in the u-bend. And looked at that way, if indeed it was a disempowered, tainted Draco whom she attracted to her nest, it's quite evidently possible that Draco reached the end of his anchor and had nowhere to go, but down. Valky From belviso at attglobal.net Mon Jan 9 16:43:08 2006 From: belviso at attglobal.net (sistermagpie) Date: Mon, 09 Jan 2006 16:43:08 -0000 Subject: Moaning Myrtle was a Mudblood... In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146144 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "dillgravy" wrote: > > Sounds like a deranged nursery rhyme, but anyway... > Has anyone explored theories on the Draco/Moaning Myrtle thing. I realize that dear Draco > (said with honest loathing) is under a lot of stress (poor thing-- again, sarcastic tone) but > why would he cry and confess to a (he said it, not me) filthy little mudblood. He does know > that Myrtle isn't pureblood. It would be against everything that little git stands for to be > befriending a mudblood ghost--- regardess of whether or not he was going to carry out > Voldemort's plan. Magpie: There's no reason to assume Draco knows anything about Myrtle's background or the fact that she was killed by the same person threatening him. He made a reference to Myrtle in CoS in speaking about the Heir of Slytherin opening the chamber and a Muggleborn dying, but he doesn't necessarily know that Myrtle is the ghost of that girl. He didn't necessarily ask her anything about her background. The fact that Draco is bonding with a Muggleborn, one whose murder he'd dismissed years before, even going so far as to claim he wished he could help her murderer, could simply be ironic. Now he's gotten his wish and is helping the Heir, and it's terrible. It would be cool for him to find this out if he doesn't know it already, but I couldn't predict what his reaction would be to finding out Myrtle was Muggleborn. -m From finwitch at yahoo.com Mon Jan 9 16:46:02 2006 From: finwitch at yahoo.com (finwitch) Date: Mon, 09 Jan 2006 16:46:02 -0000 Subject: Harry and Ginny In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146145 > Kelleyaynn: > > I'm sure that the break up at Dumbledore's funeral is not the last > we will see of Harry/Ginny until he defeats Voldemort. The build up > in HBP was too significant for it to disappear for what will > probably be nearly the entire book, only to have him come back to > her at the end. I think JKR has hinted in other ways that she is > important is some way to the ending of the story. Physically Ginny > is remarkably similar to Lily, her status as the seventh child, and > the first girl in (I think) seven generations of Weasleys I'm sure > is not just a throwaway point. Finwitch: There must indeed be something. After all, it has been established that number seven has magical qualities. Seven years of Hogwarts etc. Other important numbers that might come up: 3. I doubt that 3 tasks is a co-incidence in GoF. You know, approximate number of days in a moon (as opposed to a month, a moon is the REAL cycle of the moon.) is 28 - also, four times seven. I'd say that lycanthropy, for example, happens to follow a lunaric cycle (transformation always on full moon) but is not *really* linked to moon per se, only numerically. I really have only the Boggart-moon to support this, but I just thought: what would happen if Lupin decided to become an astronaut and visit the Moon? Could he escape his lycanthropy by space-travelling (some magical means) so far that Moon-light or Moon-gravity or Moon-whatever can't reach him? For some reason I doubt that space-travel would have any influence. Finwitch From nrenka at yahoo.com Mon Jan 9 16:58:56 2006 From: nrenka at yahoo.com (nrenka) Date: Mon, 09 Jan 2006 16:58:56 -0000 Subject: Kantian typo In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146146 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "ellecain" wrote: > The only reason I brought up Kant was because of a comment on HPfGU > Fantastic Posts that goes "Kant is arguably the Snapiest > philosopher", one that I could never comprehend. Can anyone accept > my challenge to prove to me that Snape's thinking goes along the > lines of Kantian philosophy? I speak fluent typo. :) To answer the challenge--I can't. I suspect it's a lonely artifact (being as it's from the needs-to-be-updated Fantastic Posts) of sunnier, more optimistic days of theorizing about Snape. It was a lot easier, immediately following the shocking revelations of the end of GoF (which really have lost most of their kicker by now, haven't they?) to argue for Snape as the Believer In What Is Right Regardless of Personal Cost Or Inclinations. The evidence for this was his turning away from the DEs, without any other information to complicate it. I'd say that it done be complicated by now, and furthermore, Snape has been revealed as a character driven by personal issues (regardless of whether Rowling ultimately puts a broadly-phrased white or black hat on them) to a degree that Kant doesn't apply well any more. Snape is pretty emotional, and Kant gives that part of life pretty short shrift (although I'm giving him short shrift here too). The evidence of Snape's selective application of some rules and favoritism is enough, IMO, to boot him solidly out of the Kantian camp. I can't think of a good Kantian in the series, as even McGonagall has her lapses, but she'd come closer, I suspect. It's an interesting mirror to play with in the series (I remember, faintly, having posted about it way back whenever in the archives), but I've come to the reluctant conclusion that it's not what Rowling is playing with herself, and this limits some of its application. YMMV. -Nora begins, slowly, to remember the German language From ceridwennight at hotmail.com Mon Jan 9 17:52:34 2006 From: ceridwennight at hotmail.com (Ceridwen) Date: Mon, 09 Jan 2006 17:52:34 -0000 Subject: Harry and Love RE:Special treatment of Harry or not WAS In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146147 Quick_Silver: > You've wrote several amazing posts. However I disagree with the idea > that Harry must let go of habits/traits/whatever else so that he can > be filled with "love power." I'm not saying that he shouldn't let go > of those trait because he must definitely should. It just that I > feel that "love" is either Harry's must overrated ability or his > most misunderstood one. The problem, from my point of view, is that > I don't have a handle on what exactly Harry's love ability is > supposed to be. Ceridwen: Thanks for the complement! As far as knowing what this love ability is supposed to be, I don't know either. I've read a lot of speculation, but I don't think anyone knows what it is or what it's supposed to do. I personally think he needs to let go of those traits so any form of love that might make a difference can be allowed full rein. Hatred and negative obsession have a way of stifling all forms of positive love. In RL, a lot of relationships, of all types, have been destroyed by these two things. Quick_Silver: > A lot of people say that Harry's love will fill him up with power, > deflect AKs, give him the ability to forgive Snape, to find a way to > have mercy on Voldemort, find a humane (non-AK) way to deal with > Voldemort, etc, etc. It's just that that's never the feeling I got > from the books. Harry seems to be relatively normal in his abilities > to love, maintain relationships, etc (although some would say that > he's stunted in his ability to love). That, to me, is central about > Harry he basically normal in his ability to love it's not Harry's > unique ability to love, his greater then average ability to love but > the mere fact that he can that is important. That is what makes > Harry different Voldemort who can't really love not by the > definition JK seems to be working with anyway. So basically I don't > work on the assumption that Harry's abilities to love is special > compared to Hermione's, Ron's, Neville's, Draco's, etc but that it > is special compared to Voldemort's. Ceridwen: And, it's special looking back on Harry's upbringing. He must have a greater capacity for forgiveness and love since he has them in a normal capacity after all the effects which could have starved him of them. Maybe all he needs is the normal amount, so that's what he has. I'm not suggesting that he will become Teflon!Harry, with AKs bouncing off him, or SuperMartyr!Harry who gives his life for someone he doesn't care for. All I'm saying is, if he needs love to flow unfettered, he has to remove the obstacles. Quick_Silver: > For me Harry's love is more about it giving him the ability to > experience love but not only love but also empathy, sympathy, pity, > mercy the feelings and abilities that come from being able to love > (I simplified a bit there). Those are things that Voldemort doesn't > have and I think that he is poorer because of it. Those are the > things that I feel make Harry keep on fighting against Voldemort > (sort of like on the Matrix where Agent Smith asks Neo why he get's > up to keep fighting). Ceridwen: Yeah, the kid's got moxy. ;) And, as you say, these abilities definitely seperate him from Voldemort, and from Tom Riddle before him. The big question that everyone's trying to figure out is, how will this help? I can definitely see where too much compassion could possibly hobble him in his fight. So maybe that's why he only has a 'normal amount' of love. And, a good dose of righteous hatred for the things Voldemort stands for and what he's done wouldn't be amiss, either. But the side hate he has of Snape, for instance, has got to go. His mission is Voldemort. Not Snape. His obsessive hatred of Snape is detracting from that mission. It is counterproductive, as things stand right now. He needs a laser focus on Voldemort to the exclusion of everything else. Quick_Silver: > That's why I feel that Harry's needs to undergo extensive training > so that he doesn't have to rely on the Dark Arts to give that extra > punch in the middle of a battle. I wouldn't be entirely surprised if > a large part of the final book was spent on the Horcrux hunt because > it gives Harry and co. such a good chance to learn both magic and > about themselves. However I view love as being one component of > Harry Potter, although it may be a defining component, it is not the > only component and it does require the support of the other > components. For all of Dumbledore talk about love I can't help but > notice that he's always an incredibly wizard as well so apparently > love isn't everything. Ceridwen: I agree that Harry needs more skills that aren't Dark Arts related. He's been unsuccessful every time he's tried to use them. And I like your suggestion that the horcrux hunt will also involve learning skills and, I take it, learning more about working with Ron and Hermione (your 'learning about themselves'). Inferring from HBP, I'd say he needs to think about Voldemort's backstory a bit, too, to learn about him and his methods as well. In fact, I think Dumbledore mentioned this in the horcrux cave. And Ron and Hermione can be a big help. Yes, for all this talk about love, how will Harry 'vanquish the Dark Lord'? I don't rule out killing here, because sometimes it is necessary, for the love of the world and people being saved. And, the prophecy says that neither can live while the other survives, which may mean death to one or the other. I still believe that he has to get rid of the diffusing elements so he can focus on the task at hand. And if love is any part of that, which supposedly it is, then he will need to get rid of any impediment to that love. IMO. Ceridwen. From foodiedb at optonline.net Mon Jan 9 03:25:37 2006 From: foodiedb at optonline.net (foodiedb) Date: Mon, 09 Jan 2006 03:25:37 -0000 Subject: Nagini? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146148 Hi all, I was just wondering, is there any chance that Nagini is the same snake that Harry set free in HP1? DB From ornawn at 013.net Mon Jan 9 18:16:27 2006 From: ornawn at 013.net (ornadv) Date: Mon, 09 Jan 2006 18:16:27 -0000 Subject: Horcruxes - perhaps one less to hunt Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146149 Orna: Perhaps this has been discussed, but does anyone have an idea, why DD thought Voldemort's seventh horcrux was Nagini, made with Frank's murder, and not something made with Bertha Jorkins' murder? Perhaps Voldemort was still weak, but he was strong enough to "interrogate" Bertha, and kill her. So, if he wanted to use the first killing to complete his 7 horcruxes, it should have been Bertha, and not this muggle, who just happened to be around. Another thought - since Voldemort knew he was now planning to get Harry again, wouldn't he rather wait for making his final horcrux on this occasion, in which case there is probably one less horcrux to find? Orna From staceyv2220 at yahoo.com Mon Jan 9 08:18:43 2006 From: staceyv2220 at yahoo.com (staceyv2220) Date: Mon, 09 Jan 2006 08:18:43 -0000 Subject: Is Dumbledore dead? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146150 I seem to recall something about Merlin dying and rising again from a lake of fire. Does anyone know anything about this? It would bring more understanding to the Dumbledore discussion. I have to question his death because J.K.R. repeats so many times that he will only be gone when no one is left who is loyal to him and Harry is "Dumbledore's man." "staceyv2220" From becks3uk at yahoo.co.uk Mon Jan 9 09:01:47 2006 From: becks3uk at yahoo.co.uk (Rebecca Williams) Date: Mon, 9 Jan 2006 09:01:47 +0000 (GMT) Subject: /ESE!lupin questions (long) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20060109090147.20816.qmail@web25301.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 146151 > Sherry: > I think the answer to how Sirius and Lupin knew the prophecy is > so obvious and easy to understand. I believe Alla mentioned it > last night, but I will again. I am sure that James and Lily > would have told Sirius about the prophecy. Possibly Lupin as > well. Becky: I imagine Lily and James probably did tell them yes, but the reason they knew at the time of the fight in the MoM was because all of the Order knew about it - they were taking shifts to guard it, which resulted in Arthur Weasley getting injured. Dumbledore had his reasons for not telling Harry but there was no reason not to tell the rest of the Order - hence the arguments between Sirius and Mrs Weasley about letting Harry ask questions. From bawilson at citynet.net Mon Jan 9 16:17:52 2006 From: bawilson at citynet.net (bawilson at citynet.net) Date: Mon, 9 Jan 2006 11:17:52 -0500 (EST) Subject: Draco & Unforgivables; Krum?; Inflated Aunt vs. Sectumsempera; Sir; Dursleys Message-ID: <30317039.1136823472961.JavaMail.administrator@webmail> No: HPFGUIDX 146152 skatinglibrarian: "As for the events on the Astronomy Tower, has Dumbledore forced Snape to kill him when it is obvious that Draco has failed? Did Dumbedore wish to ensure that 1. Snape won't break the vow with Narcissa and die himself and 2. Draco, still a student, won't use an Unforgivable curse." IMHO, I think #2. Dumbledore was the Headmaster of all of Hogwarts, even Slytherin. The Unforgivables are that not so much because of what they do to the victim as because of what they do to the caster. We know that in order to successfully cast 'crucio' on a person, one must really hate him or her, and really enjoy seeing him/her suffer; Avanda Kervada can only be used for murder--not manslaughter or justifiable homicide, but murder, 'intentionally and with malice aforethought killing a human being.' We may conclude that Imperius also means that one must enjoy dominating and controlling a person. Getting oneself into the mental state necessary for these curses surely causes spiritual damage. catlady: "In this case, 'about' isn't good enough. Snape was in the same year as James and Lily. James and Lily were 20 according to the Lexicon (or 22 according to me) when Harry was born. Viktor is 18 at the beginning of GoF (per Ron) when Harry has just turned 14, so Viktor is 4 to 5 years older than Harry. Snape became a father when he was 15 or 16 years old?" Perfectly possible. I've known it to happen. It is possible the the man whom Harry identifies as Viktor's father is really his stepfather; that they have similar noses is not surprising---Mrs. Krum may like men with hooked noses. Ceridwen: "But, kchuplis brought up two scenarios: Blowing up Aunt Marge, and slashing Draco. His reaction to the Aunt Marge episode, though not as horrible as the Draco episode, got more worry out of him than slashing Draco so that the bathroom was awash in blood. That's disturbing. Aunt Marge floats away, the Ministry rearranges memories, Harry's given a slap on the wrist and not kicked out of the WW, Aunt Marge is fine if lacking a memory (unfortunately, the WW didn't see fit to give her a personality change as well!), and that *seems* to carry more weight than buckets of blood?" Aunt Marge was just expressing her opinion--as ill-informed and prejudiced as it was, she had a right to it. Draco was attempting to cast the Cruciatus Curse on him; Harry had every right to defend himself. Scarfyrre: "Ms. Rowling is doing a great job conveying exactly how teenagers acted in school, and it seems the Brits are very similiar to the Yanks. Except we never called our teachers 'sir' or 'professor'." You didn't call your teachers 'sir' or 'ma'am'? I did. CH3ed: " The conditions of the protection; tho, has me wondered that if LV knew of the terms, why hasn't he tried to assassinate Petunia? If she goes, then so should go Harry's protection at the Dursley House. Without a living blood relative of Lily to reside with Harry hasn't got that protection. Tho there may be other protections yet that DD conjured up but hadn't told Harry (and us) yet." If something were to happen to Aunt Petunia, the source of the protection would move to Dudley. I still think that the 'person who does magic late in life' will be Uncle Vernon, if only because it would be such a kick in the pants for him. BAW From ornawn at 013.net Mon Jan 9 18:45:43 2006 From: ornawn at 013.net (ornadv) Date: Mon, 09 Jan 2006 18:45:43 -0000 Subject: Special treatment - yes or no/Rules Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146153 Magpie: > Point taking and giving is completely arbitrary and the > reasons given for their points at the end certainly qualify. I > (and others) have said that allowing the hall to be decorated in > Slytherin banners so that they could be taken down and replaced > a dramatic move to give a surprise to Harry unnecessarily singled > was out Slytherin and would undoubtedly have annoyed all the kids > in that house. I think Dumbledore just wanted to make his points a > surprise which involved a big PSYCH to Slytherin. >Valky: >The Trio's goal under the trapdoor has nothing to do with gaining >points, they set out to do something truly virtuous, with no thought >of the reward. The juxtaposition of these points against those of >the house that seeks only the reward therefore is how I see >Dumbledore's actions in the end of the story. Not as a criticism of >the Slytherin House, but as the demonstration of an example for all >of Hogwarts. Orna: Well, maybe the Slytherins are annoyed, but that's exactly because they are Slytherins. I can't imagine any decent student knowing something of what the trio had done, and not feeling they and their house should be decently rewarded. I mean, points are given for various reasons ? so anybody who had some innate fairness in themselves would feel that the House Cup would belong to the Gryffindors, after they had something like nearly saved the PS from VoldeQuirrel. Even if the details about Voldemort weren't common knowledge, everybody at school knew they had done something very brave and ingenious ? the twins brag about Ron winning MacGonagall's chess-game, and they know Harry has been in hospital wing. Cedric in the maze acts exactly this way ? he refuses to take the cup available to him, because he resists this temptation, and feels it to be unfair. Harry ? the same. So why do we have to accept that the Slytherins should expect the House Cup to remain theirs? They should offer to give it to the Gryffindors, if they had anything like decency in them. (OK, that's exaggerated, but only because we got used to expect so little from them). I think that it is a characteristic DD move ? any decent Slytherin would feel it was fair what happened, and any Slytherin who felt that power and winning was above all other values, would be shocked ? and rightly so IMO. Orna From Nanagose at aol.com Mon Jan 9 18:51:02 2006 From: Nanagose at aol.com (spotsgal) Date: Mon, 09 Jan 2006 18:51:02 -0000 Subject: Let's talk about Lupin In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146154 > Marianne: > > I'd be more likely to attribute > his "offness" in HBP to grief over Sirius, feeling bad because he > can't make Tonks back off without hurting her feelings, and dread > because he's again involved in the kind of guerilla war he fought > in once before Christina: Me too. Also, the war features the same bad guys, same good guys, and the spitting image of Lupin's dead childhood friend. It's like a flashback, set on loop. Lupin is always described as looking so tired and worn - his reaction to Voldemort's return must have been something like, "Sigh, again?" > Marianne: > If we assume that Lupin spent his days in isolation and loneliness > after the Potters' deaths, on the edges of society, living hand to > mouth, shut off from "normal" people, how do we account for the > active, sympahtetic, affable, confident DADA Professor? Where do > those social skills come from? Maybe Lupin is simply a really good > actor who has an innate gift for teaching that he can turn on like > a light switch after years of isolation. Or maybe, even though he > could not keep jobs long-term once people found out about him, he > was not quite so isolated and ostracized. Christina: I think it's a fair possibility that Lupin spent quite a bit of time in the Muggle world following Voldemort's first downfall. He is a half-blood, and although we don't know exactly what type he was (ie, one Muggle parent or one Muggleborn parent), he must have had some exposure to the Muggle world as a child. He wouldn't need any proof of education in order to tend bar or work in a bookshop. His lycanthropy wouldn't be a problem, either. I think his "isolation" in those 13 years was more of an isolation from *close* friends; in other words, he knew his coworkers and made small talk with them, but went home to live by himself and didn't socialize much. Many jobs could have him interacting with the public as well. Also, Lupin has probably learned a fair bit about people out of need. He is very good at keeping quiet and fading into the background, a handy skill for a man with a secret. I know a lot of people who were very quiet in school and picked up unbelievable social skills just by watching others. They can now read people like a newspaper. And yes, I do think some of it is putting on a face. Lupin is forced to lie a lot, and he's also gone through some difficult emotional things that he probably doesn't want to let show, so I think he's become a very controlled person. JKR showed strong reactions from Lupin in PoA by having that control slip - dropping briefcases, etc. > Marianne: > I guess the subtext was too subterranean for me to see ;-). Christina: Me too. Subtext? Huh? > Marianne: > From my perspective, he doesn't want to say outright that he's not > interested because he doesn't want to hurt Tonks by that kind of > rejection.... Instead, he gives her a laundry list of > reasons why he's unsuitable, which gives her the option of walking > away, and placing the onus for this relationship not working on > him. Christina: Exactly. That's the problem. Lupin *is* the type who would gently steer Tonks away from him. It would be very in character for him to refrain from denying her outright. That's why Lupin/Tonks is so frustrating, IMO. It's hard to suss out Lupin's exact feelings because he isn't the type to wear his heart on his sleeve. Christina From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Mon Jan 9 19:30:05 2006 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Mon, 09 Jan 2006 19:30:05 -0000 Subject: Special treatment - yes or no/Rules In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146155 Magpie wrote: > > Point taking and giving is completely arbitrary and the reasons given for their points at the end certainly qualify. Valky countered: House Points are not so arbitrary either, they are taken for rulebreaking and they are awarded for winning the Quidditch games. Carol responds: I agree that points are deducted for rule-breaking (and, in Snape's case, for disrespectful behavior from Harry and Ron). But points are not awarded only for winning Quidditch games or there would be little point in having a House Cup as well as a Quidditch Cup. They are also awarded in special circumstances such as the Trio and Neville acting bravely in SS/PS and Harry and his friends fighting the DEs in the MoM, an incident I'll return to later in relation to Snape. And some teachers award them for answering questions correctly or performing a spell correctly. I recall Sprout, Lupin, Flitwick, and the substitute COMC teacher Grubbly-Plank awarding points for this reason. So if Snape awarded someone points for making a potion correctly, he would not be out of line (except in rewarding points to Slytherins but not Hermione, the only Gryffindor we know of who excels at Potions). But I still don't recall his giving points for any reason, even to Draco, and certainly not to Crabbe, Goyle, Blaise, Theo, or Pansy. Anyway, I agree with Magpie that both giving and taking points seems to be arbitrary. Some teachers reward correct answers with points; others don't AFAWK. (We never see Binns, Trelawney, or many other teachers either giving or taking points. Lockhart, IIRC, gave them to people he thought were his admirers. Flitwick, in contrast, enthusiastically rewards students from any house who perform Charms well, or so we can infer from his awarding points to Hermione for making her feather hover in the very first class. McGonagall does seem to deduct points fairly, punishing both Draco and her own students for being out of bed in SS/PS, but we have no idea whether she awards them fairly as well. We don't know if she would reward a Slytherin for Transfiguring a hedgehog into a pincushion on his first attempt because we only see her with students from her own House.) The *number* of points taken away for infractions also seems to be arbitrary, just as the number of days of serving detention and the specific punishment (whether it's polishing trophies or helping Hagrid catch a unicorn killer) is completely arbitrary and at the discretion of the individual teacher. Magpie wrote: > > It is canon that Snape takes points away from Gryffindor for petty things sometimes and that we never see him take away points (or give points, that I remember) to his own house. It's also canon that in later years Slytherin is able to lose the cup despite Dumbledore not adding points at the last minute without Snape changing [the point total]. > Valky countered: > On the first point, and for the benefit of everyone who has asked me to recall my canon examples, I recall Snape giving some House points to a Slytherin Potions student, and from the perspective we are given it seems like an open display of house favouritism. I recall it happening only on one occasion, but I cannot find it in the PS/SS chapters so perhaps it is a later book. OTOH we do not see him taking away House Points from Slytherins when he clearly should have done on numerous occasions and I see you have agreed to that, Magpie. I also recall some examples of him being unwilling to give Hermione point recognition for outstanding work, and of course we all agree that he takes points from Harry at every opportunity, fair or unfair. Carol responds: I agree that Snape has never awarded Hermione any points (he merely withholds criticism from her when she does well, which from Snape probably feels like a reward) and that he only mildly chides Slytherin students (or Draco, anyway) when he would ordinarily deduct points for rule breaking. But, again, I don't remember his *giving* points at all, only deducting them (although as I said above, it would not be out of line to reward a student for performing well in a class. It seems to be accepted procedure among the few "good" teachers, including Lupin and Flitwick.) And it isn't only Gryffindor that Snape deducts points from. As we see at the Yule Ball, he takes ten points each from Ravenclaw and Hufflepuff for rule breaking (Miss Fawcett and a boy whose name I can't remember making out in the rosebushes), so at least he treats Ravenclaw and Hufflepuff equally. (I'm not arguing that he doesn't favor Slytherin; there are cases when he should deduct points from Draco and doesn't. But I would still like to see the canon for his giving points to anyone for any reason. As Magpie or someone said, "the man likes TAKING points.") As for Snape's "abuse of power" (mentioned in a paragraph that I've snipped because it's otherwise irrelevant to my argument here), I don't think he would have awarded points to Slytherin to give them back the cup in SS/PS if DD had awarded Gryffindor points for the events relating to the defeat of Quirrell!mort before the end-of-year feast. After all, he, too, was trying to thwart Quirrell, whether or not he knew that Quirrell was in league with (and possessed by) LV. And as Magpie noted, Snape doesn't interfere with the point count in any other book. Note that when Gryffindor is completely out of points in OoP and McGonagall grants fifty points each to HRH, Neville, and Ginny (and a further reluctant fifty to Luna for Ravenclaw) for the events in the MoM and then deducts the ten from Harry that Snape had intended to deduct, Snape does nothing to interfere with the point total, neither adding further points to Slytherin for some arbitrary reason nor finding cause to deduct more points from Gryffindor. Granted, he should have taken ten points from Draco as well as from Harry, but it was Harry who had his wand out and Harry admitted that he was planning to hex Draco. So from Snape's standpoint if not from the reader's, his actions were fair. It's interesting, from the standpoint of this thread, that Snape throughout the books (not counting that anamoly, HBP) is the rule enforcer, the teacher who prowls the corridors at night looking for rule breakers, the one who tries hardest (but unsuccessfully) to keep Harry out of Hogsmeade in PoA. According to Dumbledore, a Slytherin ought to have, like Harry, "a certain disrespect for the rules," yet Snape consistently enforces them, at least for Gryffindor and HRH. And he does at least stop Draco from fighting in the corridors on several occasions, even if he doesn't deduct points from him. My point is that I see no evidence that Snape is deliberately swaying the House points in favor of Slytherin by any means other than not deducting points from his own House for rule-breaking. We don't see him trying to rob Gryffindor of its victory in any other book, nor do we ever see him unfairly granting points to Slytherin. Even if Snape did grant points in the single instance that Valky recalls (and I'd like to see the canon for it, Valky, if you can find it), that instance would be an exception to his usual behavior, which is to deduct rather than add points. The only thing I recall that's at all similar to granting Slytherin unfair House points is granting *Hufflepuff* a penalty shot for what Harry considers to be no reason in a Quidditch game against Gryffindor (and Snape is probably still angry because George Weasley has just aimed a bludger at him--for no reason at all except that he's Snape.) Carol, still not seeing the evidence that Snape helped Slytherin acquire its House points unfairly in SS/PS (or any other book) but conceding that Slytherin cheats at Quidditch From bboyminn at yahoo.com Mon Jan 9 19:53:03 2006 From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Mon, 09 Jan 2006 19:53:03 -0000 Subject: Moaning Myrtle was a Mudblood... In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146156 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "dillgravy" wrote: > > Sounds like a deranged nursery rhyme, but anyway... > Has anyone explored theories on the Draco/Moaning Myrtle > thing. I realize that dear Draco (said with honest loathing) > is under a lot of stress (poor thing-- again, sarcastic tone) > but why would he cry and confess to a (he said it, not me) > filthy little mudblood. He does know that Myrtle isn't pureblood. > It would be against everything that little git stands for to be > befriending a mudblood ghost--- regardess of whether or not he > was going to carry out Voldemort's plan. > bboyminn: I'm not so sure I'm going to buy into any Vampire!Draco or WereWolf!Draco theories to explain this. Fun as they may be, they seem like imaginitive overkill to me. First, we don't actually know that Myrtle is a 'mudblood'. Yes, we assume she is, and that does seem a reasonable assumption, but we don't really know. Second, Draco is not in a position to be choosy. He certainly can't go to any of his normal friends, if we can even call them friends, and reveal his fears and weakens. That vulnerability and fear in the face of his friend would be a far greater humiliation and loss of status than associating with a ghost. Third, Myrtle is an unusual ghost; even among ghosts she is an outcast. She doesn't associate with ghost, teachers, or students. Indeed, because she is so morose, everyone would go out of their way to steer clear of her. That isolation makes her the ideal confidant. Myrtle is not likely to tell anyone because, for Myrtle, there is no one to tell. Also, Myrtle, being sad herself, can sympathize with Draco's worry and sadness. Again, a plus for Myrtle. Finally, I want to once again emphasize that Draco can't be choosy. It's with Myrtle or NO ONE. Myrtle seems more than willing to keep Draco's secrets because it means, at last, she has a like-minded friend, and given Myrtle lack of social life, a friend would be a precious thing to be guarded and protected. Also, being dead, Myrtle would have nothing to gain by revealing Draco's secrets. So, I think Myrtle's alleged Mudblood status was irrelavant to Draco, he was simply glad for someone to talk to that he could trust with his secrets. Just a thought. Steve/bboyminn From emptyvoices at hotmail.com Mon Jan 9 19:52:23 2006 From: emptyvoices at hotmail.com (caryn bailey) Date: Mon, 09 Jan 2006 11:52:23 -0800 Subject: Harry and detentions Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146157 High School doesn't seem that long ago and it's been already almost 9 years. Anyway, I was one of those wierd people who never got a detention in middle or high school. I was sort of the ideal student I guess but most classmates around me could of cared less about the shame associated with detention. In fact, I at times regret the fact that I really didn't take risks and therefore acquire one so that I could be somewhat normal in school as normalcy was that most students had one at least a couple times a year. It was annoying to them, sure but well, whatever. Honestly, in analyzing Harry's behavior at school, I thought a lot of his punishments were appropriate. Sure, Snape played favorites and was unfair on most occasions however, the things Harry's father did and got away with against him was disgusting. His father should have been suspended or kicked of the quittage team for his actions. Snape is projecting on Harry and I think Harry experiences some regret in seeing what his father did to Snape...he feels initial sympathy and understanding but that sort of disolves. I actually am uncertain why DD trust Snape as much as he does. Punishment wise, Harry has gotten himself into danger with his reckless attitude and behavior and is a little arrogant as well. I'm not saying that he didn't behave courageously or is an compulsive trouble maker but he's pretty reckless. His apparent disrespect for Snape not withstanding. I think he deserved a lot of those punishments. I guess I believe that Snape is not evil. I just have sympathy for his character and find him interesting. I suppose that is why it is such an interesting debate. Caryn From rdoliver30 at yahoo.com Mon Jan 9 19:56:24 2006 From: rdoliver30 at yahoo.com (lupinlore) Date: Mon, 09 Jan 2006 19:56:24 -0000 Subject: Let's talk about Lupin - True Love at Last? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146158 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Steve" wrote: > > No, I don't think it is a 'narrative afterthought' since the first > clues appear in Chapter Four when Harry arrives at the Burrow. For it > to appear that early in the book, it seems clear the author always > intended for it to be there. IMHO > Why on Earth would it seem clear? It certainly isn't clear to me. In fact, I'd say a "narrative afterthought" is a wonderful way to describe it. It seems that JKR late in the game decided "what the hey, I'll give 'em something they'll like. Let's do the Remus/Tonks thing!" She wrote the last scene, went back and salted a few clues in here and there in the earlier chapters, and there you have it! A nice, neat, popular ship inserted as an afterthought with little or no build up and an extremely corny pay-off. Lupinlore From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Mon Jan 9 20:33:31 2006 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Mon, 09 Jan 2006 20:33:31 -0000 Subject: Moaning Myrtle was a Mudblood... In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146159 Magpie wrote: > > There's no reason to assume Draco knows anything about Myrtle's background or the fact that she was killed by the same person threatening him. He made a reference to Myrtle in CoS in speaking about the Heir of Slytherin opening the chamber and a Muggleborn dying, but he doesn't necessarily know that Myrtle is the ghost of that girl. He didn't necessarily ask her anything about her background. The fact that Draco is bonding with a Muggleborn, one whose murder he'd dismissed years before, even going so far as to claim he wished he could help her murderer, could simply be ironic. Now he's gotten his wish and is helping the Heir, and it's terrible. It would be cool for him to find this out if he doesn't know it already, but I couldn't predict what his reaction would be to finding out Myrtle was Muggleborn. Carol responds: I agree on all counts. It's unlikely that he knows she's a Muggleborn and ironic that he'd seek consolation from a "filthy little Mudblood," but that's the least of his worries now. He can't confide in Snape, who may have been his mentor in the past, but whom he now sees (wrongly, IMO) as a rival for his "glory." He can't confide in his fellow Slytherins, to whom he bragged earlier of the honor of his mission for Voldemort. (I wonder, though, where Theo Nott fits in with all this, since he, too, is a Death Eater's son and wasn't present for the bragging session.) Crabbe and Goyle are fellow DE's sons and at least one of them also has a father in Azkaban, but he either doesn't trust them to keep quiet about his mission if he confided it to them or he knows that their inferior intellects will prevent them from understanding his dilemma. He's undoubtedly ashamed of his seeming weakness and he's terrified for himself and for his mother, but unlike Harry he has no trusted friends to share his fears and embarrassment with. Who better than a dead person, a ghost (whom he may well have met in the Prefect's bathroom), to understand his fear of death? And much better a girl than a boy. A girl would offer sympathy and listen to his woes, not pat him on the shoulder and tell him "bracingly" (Fred and George-style) that everything is okay when he knows it's not, but he can't confide in Pansy, who admires him and thinks he's brave and gallant, a true Knight of Walpurgis on a crusade for the Dark Lord. So it's Myrtle or no one. Draco is still Draco, of course, and I'm guessing that anger and embarrassment at having been seen crying and seeking the sympathy of a girl (dead or otherwise) has something to do with Draco's attempt to Crucio Harry rather than merely hex him as he would have done under different circumstances. But Draco has grown desperate; he's already attempted murder twice and has cast an illegal Imperius Curse, so a Crucio is no longer the big deal it once would have been. Everything has changed; even his interest in school and Quidditch is gone. Being a Prefect means nothing to him. And yet being a DE is much harder and more terrifying than he could possibly have anticipated. Draco's world has turned upside down. In his confusion, he seeks solace where he can find it, even from a homely ghost who haunts a girl's bathroom. It would be the last straw to find out that she's the ghost of the "mudblood" that Tom Riddle murdered. Like Magpie, I'm quite sure he doesn't know it in HBP. Carol, imagining Draco's ghost sharing the U-bend with Moaning Myrtle in the epilogue of Book 7 From erikog at one.net Mon Jan 9 21:01:32 2006 From: erikog at one.net (krista7) Date: Mon, 09 Jan 2006 21:01:32 -0000 Subject: Phineas Nigellus: Witness for Snape? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146160 I apologize if this has come up already--I did a search through August on Phineas' name and didn't see anything similar. I was going back through the book on the Draco/Myrtle exchange, and I saw something (p. 339, US hardback). Harry's telling Dumbledore about hearing Draco/Snape. AD tells Harry that what he's reporting isn't news to him, and Harry can't believe it: <<<"So, sir," said Harry, in what he hoped was a polite, calm voice, "you definitely still trust--?" "I have been tolerant enough to answer that question already," said Dumbledore, but he did not sound very tolerant anymore. "My answer has not changed." "I should think not," said a snide voice; Phineas Nigellus was evidently only pretending to be asleep.>>> Why is Phineas piping up in this scene, if not to establish: 1.) He knows *why* AD is loyal to Snape *and* shares his belief in Snape. He isn't saying, "Because headmasters don't listen to teenagers!" or "When I was alive, I wouldn't have sassed my headmaster!" or "Shut up, trying to sleep here!" He's making a specific comment to back up what AD said. 2.) Phineas listens in on things a lot, even if he's not making making comments. ("Only pretending to be asleep.") My suggestion: Ol' Phineas is going to have a lot to spill in Book 7. Krista From gav_fiji at yahoo.com Mon Jan 9 21:10:01 2006 From: gav_fiji at yahoo.com (Goddlefrood) Date: Mon, 09 Jan 2006 21:10:01 -0000 Subject: Horcruxes - perhaps one less to hunt In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146161 > Orna wrote: So, if he wanted to use the first killing to complete his 7 horcruxes, it should have been Bertha, and not this muggle, who just happened to be around. Another thought - since Voldemort knew he was now planning to get Harry again, wouldn't he rather wait for making his final horcrux on this occasion, in which case there is probably one less horcrux to find? Goddlefrood says: Bertha was of no signifance to LV, thus it would seem unlikely in light of what we have been told (that is that LV saved making Horcruxes for significant murders) that he would use her murder to create a Horcrux. Also there would be a possibility that Wormtail would have found out what was going on and IMHO LV does not trust Wormtail. Upon killing Frank Bryce, and assuming that LV did create a Horcurx with his killing as Dumbledore suggests, Tom would have severed all links with the Muggle world of his youth and eliminated the last potential witness to his murder of his grandparents and father. This would be significant to LV as far as I am concerned. On the matter of waiting to create a Horcrux from Harry's murder it would be most unlikely because LV would want to be fully protected before facing a person whom he believes (based on the portion of the prophecy known to LV) to have the power to defeat him. His discussion with Slughorn that we have been shown strongly suggests that LV would want to make six Horcruxes and leave one portion of soul in his body, making seven soul fragments in all (his supposedly favourite magic number). The problem with the Horcruxes is that LV would not appear to be a person who would stop at only six created Horcruxes. It would be interesting to speculate, as I do, whether he actually made far more. This last I have concluded will be the mystery left at the end referred to by JKR. Goddlefrood From sonjamccartCPA at verizon.net Mon Jan 9 20:57:07 2006 From: sonjamccartCPA at verizon.net (sonjaartemisia) Date: Mon, 09 Jan 2006 20:57:07 -0000 Subject: Nagini? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146162 foodiedb wrote: > > Hi all, > I was just wondering, is there any chance that Nagini is the same > snake that Harry set free in HP1? > DB > Sonja: This has been discussed but since I did some research on the type of snake Nagini could be, I am happy to answer. Harry set free a boa constrictor. That species does not have fangs or venom. Nagini is a viper, and based on the description (diamond pattern and about twelve feet long) is probably a type of King Cobra. According to my sources that species is the longest known viper http://www.szgdocent.org/resource/rr/c-cking.htm Or she could just be a magical snake, but definitely not the one Harry set free. SonjaArtemisia From katmac at katmac.cncdsl.com Mon Jan 9 21:13:25 2006 From: katmac at katmac.cncdsl.com (lagattalucianese) Date: Mon, 09 Jan 2006 21:13:25 -0000 Subject: RatSpy/Ch7summary/VeelaGrandma/Crystallized/BlaiseMum/HagridPals/ViktorSnape In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146163 > ... > > << Luna presumes he???s been attacked by a Wrackspurt, an invisible > creature that floats through one???s ear into one???s brain, making it > all fuzzy. As Luna bats off imagined Wrackspurts,Harry and Neville > exchange a look and hastily change the subject. >> > > I dunno why Luna is given the line about Wrackspurts, when they are > quite obviously real, at least based on my experience. > La Gatta Lucianese: My place must be crawling with them. I wonder, is that what the cats are staring at when they gaze off into space? > > << Fleur's grandmother is/was a Veela, that means her mother is half > Veela >> > > Unless the Veela grandmother is her father's mother instead of her > mother's mother. > La Gatta Lucianese: Are veela akin to vilias, viljas, and wilis? > > << what in the world crystalized pinneapple is... >> > > I've been assuming it is dried pineapple chunks coated in sugar, like > crystallized ginger. I believe that 'crystallized' is a reference to > the sugar, like the way sugar forms rock candy. > La Gatta Lucianese: I don't think it's the same thing as candied pineapple, that revolting sticky stuff that grocery stores carry around Christmastime, which is a component of fruitcake. I think I've seen the crystallized sort in candy stores. It must be cooked in a sugar syrup, then allowed to cool. It's covered with a thin sugary coating, unlike candied or crystallized ginger, which has sugar crystals all over the outside. From gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk Mon Jan 9 21:13:49 2006 From: gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk (Geoff Bannister) Date: Mon, 09 Jan 2006 21:13:49 -0000 Subject: Nagini? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146164 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "foodiedb" wrote: > > Hi all, > I was just wondering, is there any chance that Nagini is the same > snake that Harry set free in HP1? > DB Geoff: The general consensus is no. The topic has been addressed more then once, the most recent being a thread "Voldemort's snake" which began early last September at message 139675 and has several posts leading up to 139693. From ms-tamany at rcn.com Mon Jan 9 21:29:51 2006 From: ms-tamany at rcn.com (Tammy Rizzo) Date: Mon, 9 Jan 2006 16:29:51 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Nagini? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <014301c61563$d37dcb20$6600a8c0@sparky> No: HPFGUIDX 146165 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "foodiedb" wrote: > > Hi all, > I was just wondering, is there any chance that Nagini is the same > snake that Harry set free in HP1? > DB Nope, sorry, not a chance. Nagini is a poisonous snake with fangs and some serious venom (just ask Arthur), who is milked, or her venom expressed, for the potion or whatever that LV had been living off of between Wormtail finding him and LV getting his body. The snake in HP1 was a constrictor (just ask the sign in his cage), and they're not poisonous. *** Tammy Rizzo ms-tamany at rcn.com [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From a_svirn at yahoo.com Mon Jan 9 21:31:40 2006 From: a_svirn at yahoo.com (a_svirn) Date: Mon, 09 Jan 2006 21:31:40 -0000 Subject: Harry and Love (Special treatment of Harry ) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146166 > Quick_Silver: >So > > basically I don't work on the assumption that Harry's abilities to > > love is {not} special compared to Hermione's, Ron's, Neville's, > > Draco's, etc but that it is special compared to Voldemort's. > > Jen: I agree with this statement wholeheartedly. I think what makes > Harry different from the rest is the weapons Voldemort keeps handing > him. a_svirn: Yet neither Ron nor Hermione nor Draco were born as the seventh month dies. Admittedly, Voldemort made Harry special by choosing him and inadvertently marking him as his equal, but it's not like anyone with the ability to love would do. The choice was only between Harry and Neville. From belviso at attglobal.net Mon Jan 9 22:10:24 2006 From: belviso at attglobal.net (sistermagpie) Date: Mon, 09 Jan 2006 22:10:24 -0000 Subject: Moaning Myrtle was a Mudblood... In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146167 > Carol : He can't confide in Snape, > who may have been his mentor in the past, but whom he now sees > (wrongly, IMO) as a rival for his "glory." He can't confide in his > fellow Slytherins, to whom he bragged earlier of the honor of his > mission for Voldemort. (I wonder, though, where Theo Nott fits in with > all this, since he, too, is a Death Eater's son and wasn't present for > the bragging session.) Crabbe and Goyle are fellow DE's sons and at > least one of them also has a father in Azkaban, but he either doesn't > trust them to keep quiet about his mission if he confided it to them > or he knows that their inferior intellects will prevent them from > understanding his dilemma. He's undoubtedly ashamed of his seeming > weakness and he's terrified for himself and for his mother, but unlike > Harry he has no trusted friends to share his fears and embarrassment > with. Magpie: I think there's also good reason to think Draco's under orders not to tell. This mission is so secret Bellatrix when Snape says he's heard about it. I can imagine Voldemort making it very clear that Draco isn't to go telling anyone about it--he doesn't want him to have allies. Whatever the reason for it, not knowing is much better for all of Draco's friends, the closest of which have always been very loyal and helpful to him in the past. Crabbe and Goyle are helping, though they don't know the plan, and Crabbe seems to have gotten concerned about it enough to argue about Draco's not telling them. Myrtle may know nothing more than someone is forcing him to do something and will kill him if he's not successful, which he doesn't think he will be. Myrtle actually isn't a good confidante--if she were she wouldn't start talking to Harry to begin with, I'd guess. -m From tonks_op at yahoo.com Mon Jan 9 22:32:19 2006 From: tonks_op at yahoo.com (Tonks) Date: Mon, 09 Jan 2006 22:32:19 -0000 Subject: Let's talk about Lupin - True Love at Last? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146168 Lupin and Tonks: OK, I can't stand it a minute longer. I don't understand why everyone is so down on the idea of Lupin and Tonks. They seem like a logical pair to me! And I don't think that Lupin is trying to let her down gently. I think he is just as much in love with her as she is with him. Tonks is not a stupid woman, she would know if a man was in love with her or not. Often when an older man falls in love with a younger woman, he later tries to talk himself out of the relationship because he is sure that when he is 10 years older she is going to be tired of him and want a younger man. So the fact that Lupin tells Tonks that he is too old is just that sort of thing happening added to his state of depression and sense of worthlessness in the current (werewolf spy) situation. I think there are plenty of clues that the adult members of the Order know that Lupin and Tonks were dating. Harry does not know about it, of course. But Molly tried to get Tonks to come around when Lupin is there. And Arthur would not have said what he did in the Hospital if he had not been aware of the situation beforehand and probably had some talks with Lupin about it. Arthur seems like the sort of person that Lupin might talk to about such things. Molly might even have suggested that her husband have a little talk with Lupin when the two men were together. You can just hear her telling Arthur that, now can't you? Some here have even suggested that Snape (who is probably not in the loop on such things) even knew because of the type of change in Tonks' patronus. Now why would they be ideal for each other? Let me count the ways. Steve said: "Keep in mind that Lupin has been this 'social outcast' since he was a young child." Let me suggest that being a metamorphmagus might not be the most "normal" thing to be in the block where Tonks grew up either. So they may have some early childhood events in common here. Tonks is one of the few women Lupin could ever be with, because like James and Sirius she can transform with him each month. They are both members of the Order, here one could say that they share the same political ideas. They may have bonded under the stress of the war, but that often happens both in real life and in the movies. Those marriages work out OK most of the time. It is clear to me that they not only are both in love with each other, but made for each other. Tonks_op From xcpublishing at yahoo.com Mon Jan 9 22:38:26 2006 From: xcpublishing at yahoo.com (xcpublishing) Date: Mon, 09 Jan 2006 22:38:26 -0000 Subject: Subject: Re: Let's talk about Lupin - True Love at Last? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146169 Lupinlore writes: >>I'd say a "narrative afterthought" is a wonderful way to describe it. It seems that JKR late in the game decided "what the hey, I'll give 'em something they'll like. Let's do the Remus/Tonks thing!" She wrote the last scene, went back and salted a few clues in here and there in the earlier chapters, and there you have it! A nice, neat, popular ship inserted as an afterthought with little or no build up and an extremely corny pay-off. That's exactly what I thought when I read it! JKR had a nice, easy way to stop some of the Lupin craziness flying around online that she was likely getting very tired of: Lupin was in love with Sirius. Lupin was in love with Lily. Lupin was in love with James. Lupin was in love with Hermione's cat. I always felt the whole Tonks/Lupin thing was contrived. When Harry stumbled upon Tonks wandering the halls of Hogwarts, I thought, "Aha! What is she doing there at Hogwarts? Why is she acting so weird? I know! It isn't her! It's someone using Polymorph potion! But who? And why?" Imagine my utter disgust when it turned out to actually be Tonks moping about Hogwarts to drum up sympathy for her unrequited love for Lupin. I'm thinking, who at Hogwarts even wants to listen to her whine about it? Dumbledore? He's busy. McGonagal? She doesn't have the patience for that. Hagrid? I suppose, but she'd have to listen to him talk about his latest horrific pet in return. Not worth it. Then who? Frankly, it has always bugged me that Tonks was at Hogwarts lurking near the Room of Requirement and I never accepted JKR's pat explanation. I keep hoping there is a better reason. I did feel a lot of Order of the Phoenix was written to shut down rumors. The whole Ginny/Harry thing was another wrap-up to stave off the hoards of Harry loves "X" rumors. I think the Fleur/Bill storyline was another to clamp down on the Fleur questions. Nicky Joe From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Mon Jan 9 22:45:23 2006 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Mon, 09 Jan 2006 22:45:23 -0000 Subject: Nagini? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146170 Sonja wrote: > Nagini is a viper, and based on the description (diamond pattern and about twelve feet long) is probably a type of King Cobra. According to my sources that species is the longest known viper > > http://www.szgdocent.org/resource/rr/c-cking.htm > > Or she could just be a magical snake, but definitely not the one Harry set free. Carol responds: I agree that Nagini is not the (apparently) male boa constrictor that Harry set free, which was probably recaptured by zookeepers as it attempted to make its way from London to Brazil. Good luck with that one, Amigo!) I also agree that she's a viper, probably more than ordinarily poisonous, and almost certainly magical in her own right or Voldemort wouldn't set such store by her. Somewhere (is it in HBP?) she's described as being a "venomous green," which struck me as I read it as resembling both the basilisk in CoS (also deadly and magical) and the Avada Kedavra curse. That doesn't match well with the diamond pattern described in (IIRC) the first chapter of GoF, but JKR isn't always absolutely consistent. She may be a boomslang, in which case her skin has magical properties. I didn't find "Boomslang" in FB, but in RL boomslangs are deadly African vipers that can be brown or green: http://www.survivaliq.com/survival/poisonous-snakes-and-lizards-boomslang.htm That strikes me as a good match for Nagini, whose "milk" (venom) is also apparently magical as it helped Voldemort to survive when he was in his fetal form and was also, IIRC, used in the potion our supposedly untalented rat friend used to create that rudimentary body for Vapor!mort. Another loyal female servant for Voldie, the serpentine equivalent of Bellatrix, and a surrogate mother as well, providing mother's milk for a thoroughly repulsive infant. (Shudder!) He may have discovered her in Albania, though what a boomslang (if that's what she is) would be doing in Albania is anybody's guess, or he could have befriended her on his travels before he returned to England to recruit followers for VW1. (If Vapor!mort was possessing her part of the time, that might explain how Quirrell could find him and take him to England before Vapor!mort took up residence in his head and how Wormtail got him back from Albania as well. But he wouldn't have wanted to possess her too often before she was a Horcrux because it would use up her life force, so he possessed rats and other small animals instead.) At any rate, she's Voldemort's familiar, and there's an uncanny empathy between them whether or not she's a Horcrux. (I think she is, and he was possessing his own Horcrux when Nagini attacked Mr. Weasley.) That may be what Dumbledore meant by "in essence divided" when the (green?) smoke formed itself into a two-headed snake in OoP. (If Voldie had an Animagus form it would definitely be a snake.) So definitely not the snake in SS/PS, which was only a plot device to intorduce Harry's magical powers and foreshadow his ability to speak Parseltongue in CoS. The defeat of Nagini may be foreshadowed as well by the killing of the Basilisk in CoS. (I'm betting that Harry will use the Sword of Gryffindor to do it.) On a side note (Do I overuse that expression? Don't answer.), Nagini can mean female snake, female cobra, or female snake being, depending on which source you consult. I would say that she's possibly a boomslang, probably a Horcrux, and definitely magical. Carol From stevejjen at earthlink.net Mon Jan 9 23:24:12 2006 From: stevejjen at earthlink.net (Jen Reese) Date: Mon, 09 Jan 2006 23:24:12 -0000 Subject: Metamorphmagus abilities (Re: Let's talk about Lupin - True ...?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146171 Tonks_op: > Let me suggest that being a metamorphmagus might not be the > most "normal" thing to be in the block where Tonks grew up either. > So they may have some early childhood events in common here. Tonks > is one of the few women Lupin could ever be with, because like James > and Sirius she can transform with him each month. Jen: That's a new idea. I wonder if Tonks is actually able to change into an animal like James and Sirius or just to modify her appearance? I figured since we haven't seen her change form she isn't capable of that unless she is also an animagus. You'd think being a metamorphmagus would make learning the animagus transformations much easier! But Hermione didn't recognize Tonks as one of the seven registered for the century and I think her name would ring a bell for Hermione if she'd read it before. Now I'm wondering if JKR made Tonks a metamorphmagus for other reasons besides fun and using it as a red herring for the ship? We know for sure Harry doesn't have the ability according to her website. I used to think Andromeda, as Sirius' favorite cousin, would play a role in future books and might turn out to be a metamorphmagus, too. But unless she's currently posing as someone else we've already met it doesn't seem likely she's going to suddenly appear now. Jen From miles at martinbraeutigam.de Mon Jan 9 23:36:08 2006 From: miles at martinbraeutigam.de (Miles) Date: Tue, 10 Jan 2006 00:36:08 +0100 Subject: Phineas Nigellus: Witness for Snape? References: Message-ID: <008f01c61575$789622e0$14b2a8c0@rechnerchen> No: HPFGUIDX 146172 krista7 wrote: > Why is Phineas piping up in this scene, if not to establish: > 1.) He knows *why* AD is loyal to Snape *and* shares > his belief in Snape. He isn't saying, "Because headmasters > don't listen to teenagers!" or "When I was alive, I wouldn't > have sassed my headmaster!" or "Shut up, trying to sleep here!" > He's making a specific comment to back up what AD said. > 2.) Phineas listens in on things a lot, even if he's not making > making comments. ("Only pretending to be asleep.") > My suggestion: Ol' Phineas is going to have a lot to > spill in Book 7. Miles: I think you mention a really interesting point hear. AFAIR, Phineas is the only former headmaster we really come to know, all the others are only mentioned as "hanging around" (most times). And yes, the comment of Phineas you quoted is different from most of the others, and it really sounds like he *knows* something rather then just commenting about Harry's behaviour. There was much consideration whether the portraits would tell e.g. McG about Dumbledore's secrets. Maybe Phineas won't talk to McG - but Harry? Harry is different. Harry is somehow the "heir of the Black's" - Sirius was the last Black, so he owns the second portrait of Phineas - maybe he will see Harry as part of the family, somehow. Miles From maria8162001 at yahoo.com Mon Jan 9 18:04:33 2006 From: maria8162001 at yahoo.com (Maria Vaerewyck) Date: Mon, 09 Jan 2006 18:04:33 -0000 Subject: Snape/DD Unbreakable Vow, Is DD really dead? (was Re: Son of Snape) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146173 skatinglibrarian wrote: > > Now that we know about Unbreakable vows ... is there the > possibility that there was one between Dumbledore and Snape? > Dumbeldore will keep Snape's son hidden if Snape will work for > the order? > > As for the events on the Astronomy Tower, has Dumbledore > forced Snape to kill him when it is obvious that Draco has > failed? Did Dumbedore wish to ensure that 1. Snape won't break > the vow with Narcissa and die himself and 2. Draco, still a > student, won't use an Unforgivable curse. Finally, having a > well prepared mind and knowing that his powers are waning, is > Dumbledore willing to sacrifice himself to help keep the game > going? maria8162001: About Unbreakable between Snape and Dumbledore, I don't think there is one. We know that Dumbledore just make the person promised like what he did with Harry, and I guess that's what he did with Snape, as well. Don't think killed Dumbledore at all even when JK said she needs to kill all those who are close to Harry so Harry have to go on alone. If even that Dumbledore is really dead, then Snape killed him with his consent for the greater good and to save an innocent. I know a lot of readers believed that Snape is totally on the other side but I want to believe he's not because of all the clues before and after he killed Dumbledore it says otherwise. There are a lot of clues and there's one that I would like to mention that I cannot find ever mentioned anywhere else on every HP site I went. It's on the page 564 of HBP UK edition: "Kill me,then" panted Harry, who felt no fear at all,but only rage and contempt. Kill me like you killed him, you coward-" "DON'T-' screamed Snape, and his face was suddenly demented, inhuman, as though he was in as much pain as the yelping, howling dog stuck in the burning house behind them, '-CALL ME COWARD!' Why would he be so enraged when Harry called him coward the second time around? Why his wasn't he angry the first time Harry called him coward? HBP, UK edition page 562: 'Fight back!' Harry screamed at him. 'Fight back, you cowardly- ''Coward, did you call me, Potter?' shouted Snape.' Your father would never attack me unless it was four on one, what would you call him, I wonder?' Snape got angry when Harry called him coward the second time because Harry mentioned that he killed Dumbledore and Snape's expression the way JK described it is understandable, an expression of a person who is in pain for doing he loathed to do and being misunderstood. So I guess and I really hope that Dumbledore is not really dead and that him and Snape have planned it all, to save both Draco and Snape from Voldemort. Anyway, nobody saw the body of Dumbledore during the funeral and his wand wasn't mentioned anymore after it flew away from his hand when Draco said the disarming spell. The wizard's wand is very important. I guess Dumbledore would still be in the 7th book. From montavilla47 at yahoo.com Mon Jan 9 22:06:59 2006 From: montavilla47 at yahoo.com (montavilla47) Date: Mon, 09 Jan 2006 22:06:59 -0000 Subject: Special treatment - yes or no/Rules In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146174 Orna wrote: > Cedric in the maze acts exactly this way ? he refuses to take > the cup available to him, because he resists this temptation, > and feels it to be unfair. Harry ? the same. So why do we have > to accept that the Slytherins should expect the House Cup to > remain theirs? They should offer to give it to the Gryffindors, > if they had anything like decency in them. (OK, that's > exaggerated, but only because we got used to expect so little > from them). I think that it is a characteristic DD move ? any > decent Slytherin would feel it was fair what happened, and any > Slytherin who felt that power and winning was above all other > values, would be shocked ? and rightly so IMO. Montavilla47: There's a big, big difference in giving up the cup because you feel it's unfair, or somehow more "right" for the cup to go to the other person and having it snatched away from you. Perhaps, given the chance, the Slytherins would have made the gesture of giving up the cup to Gryffindor for the Trio's actions. They weren't given that chance. A more apt analogy would be if Harry and Cedric were running after the Tri-Wizard cup at full tilt and Croody showed up, stunned Cedric, and handed the prize to Harry. From stevejjen at earthlink.net Mon Jan 9 23:44:03 2006 From: stevejjen at earthlink.net (Jen Reese) Date: Mon, 09 Jan 2006 23:44:03 -0000 Subject: /ESE!lupin questions (long) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146175 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "pippin_999" wrote: > Before answering, I'd like to point out that ESE!Lupin is > really a theory about the plot rather than the character. The > basic assumption is not that Lupin is a rotter, but that the books > overall have a mystery plot. > > That is, an unidentified character is responsible for much of what > is wrong with the protagonist's world, and the discovery of this > character is essential to the resolution of the story. Jen: I think JKR said the series is not primarily a mystery, though. That's how I read her comment from the TLC/MN interview: JKR: There's a theory - this applies to detective novels, and then Harry, which is not really a detective novel, but it feels like one sometimes ? that you should not have romantic intrigue in a detective book. Jen: JKR is saying there are elements of a detective story, but it's not the primary genre and therefore I don't think the series needs to have the denouement of an unknown spy at the end. Plus JKR elaborated on the genre she is working primarily from: JKR: Yeah, well, I think if you take a step back, in the genre of writing that I'm working in, almost always the hero must go on alone. That's the way it is, we all know that, so the question is when and how, isn't it, if you know anything about the construction of that kind of plot. Jen: She does mix genres, but the claim of a primary genre would be the best guide to the ending. From hp_fan55 at yahoo.com Mon Jan 9 23:41:10 2006 From: hp_fan55 at yahoo.com (hp_fan55) Date: Mon, 09 Jan 2006 23:41:10 -0000 Subject: other ways to destroy Voldemort In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146176 Allies426 wrote: > I do not believe for a second that Harry will "kill" Voldemort > or even attempt an Avada Kedavra. HP_Fan55: I agree with allies426 in that "I do not believe for a second that Harry will "kill" Voldemort or even attempt an Avada Kedavra." I somewhere remember during the battle with Voldemort at the MOM in OotP that Dumbledore tells Voldemort that there are worse things than death. I feel Harry during a period of enlightenment (after the destruction of all but one of the horcruxes) and during the final battle will remember those words and invoke that to defeat Voldemort. Just my opinion though. From hambtty at triad.rr.com Tue Jan 10 00:52:04 2006 From: hambtty at triad.rr.com (hambtty) Date: Tue, 10 Jan 2006 00:52:04 -0000 Subject: Nagini? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146177 If it is that's two close to LV who are in Harry's debt. Could be - --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "foodiedb" wrote: > > Hi all, > I was just wondering, is there any chance that Nagini is the same > snake that Harry set free in HP1? > DB > From hambtty at triad.rr.com Tue Jan 10 00:56:56 2006 From: hambtty at triad.rr.com (hambtty) Date: Tue, 10 Jan 2006 00:56:56 -0000 Subject: Nagini? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146178 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "sonjaartemisia" wrote: > > > foodiedb wrote: > > > > Hi all, > > I was just wondering, is there any chance that Nagini is the same > > snake that Harry set free in HP1? > > DB > > > > Sonja: > This has been discussed but since I did some research on the type of snake Nagini could be, I am happy to answer. > > Harry set free a boa constrictor. That species does not have fangs or venom. Nagini is a viper, and based on the description (diamond pattern and about twelve feet long) is probably a type of King Cobra. According to my sources that species is the longest known viper > > http://www.szgdocent.org/resource/rr/c-cking.htm > > Or she could just be a magical snake, but definitely not the one Harry set free. > > SonjaArtemisia Interesting but JKR is not known for her knowledge of snakes. The zoo snake winked at him - snakes do not have eyelids. Is she aware that boas do not have fangs or venom? > From elfundeb at gmail.com Tue Jan 10 02:12:40 2006 From: elfundeb at gmail.com (elfundeb) Date: Mon, 9 Jan 2006 21:12:40 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Let's talk about Lupin In-Reply-To: References: <80f25c3a0601082002o40bbfed6qf7e52f36cdd5daa8@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <80f25c3a0601091812k559f5877u1d5751a1c2ccf0d@mail.gmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 146179 Marianne: But, Lupin is still in contact with other Order members. He knows his werewolf assignment is not a sentence for the rest of his life, even though he sounds bitter about it to Harry. Debbie: He does have some contact with other Order members, although his association with the werewolves must limit that, as indicated by the fact that he is rarely around. Also, Order headquarters is no longer at 12 Grimmauld Place. Whatever its shortcomings, 12GP was a home, and Lupin's close friend lived there. We don't know where the Order's new HQ is, but it might not be the kind of place where any hospitality is offered. Marianne: His coping mechanisms as you've described them would make more sense to me if Lupin knew that, indeed, this was to be his life from now on- stuck with the werewolves forever. I'd be more likely to attribute his "offness" in HBP to grief over Sirius, feeling bad because he can't make Tonks back off without hurting her feelings, and dread because he's again involved in the kind of guerilla war he fought in once before, and he's once again losing people he cares about. But, as we don't hear him say any of this, it's pure speculation on my part. Debbie: Undoubtedly grief over Sirius is part of the reason for Lupin's gloom. And I read in his HBP behaviour a general wariness of entering into any more close relationships because in spite of the general loneliness and poverty he has endured, the greatest pain has come from the loss of those he loved. He knows he can handle the loneliness, so he chooses it over the possibility of being burned again. Marianne: I see your point with regards to Lupin's fatalism and that he may be reverting to ingrained coping mechanisms. However, this, too then strikes a wrong note. If we assume that Lupin spent his days in isolation and loneliness after the Potters' deaths, on the edges of society, living hand to mouth, shut off from "normal" people, how do we account for the active, sympahtetic, affable, confident DADA Professor? Where do those social skills come from? Debbie: Being pleasant and approachable doesn't require great social skills, and though Lupin is kindly, he works very hard at maintaining barriers to his innermost thoughts and feelings. (Isn't his seeming lack of emotion of of the planks in the ESE!Lupin platform?) Despite his close association with James, he is reluctant to get at all close to Harry (Sirius is Lupin's absolute opposite number in this respect). Lupin seems relatively at ease at Hogwarts in POA, but it's a place with very fond memories for him, and his peers are largely the same people who were his teachers when he attended. Also, I bet that at least Dumbledore must have remained in contact with Lupin during the dark years. (He can't have been entirely alone, as you say, though visitors were probably rare.) Marianne: Maybe Lupin is simply a really good actor who has an innate gift for teaching that he can turn on like a light switch after years of isolation. Or maybe, even though he could not keep jobs long-term once people found out about him, he was not quite so isolated and ostracized. Debbie: I think he has an innate gift for relating to others who have suffered from loss and loneliness, making him particularly good at reaching that kind of student. Harry and Neville both fall into this category. (There's also the curious suitcase labeled "Professor R.J. Lupin," suggesting that he's taught before.) Marianne: You and I are both speculating about Lupin's life, and certainly you could be right on the money. We're probably on the same scale, just at different points along it. Debbie: True, but there's no other way to fill in the blanks about him except to extrapolate based on our respective understanding of his character, since he doesn't wear his heart on his sleeve. And it can be very annoying to have filled in the blanks one way, only to have a fact suddenly revealed that requires you erase everything. Marianne: I'm not sure what you mean by this. Are you saying he took on the werewolf spying job because it fit in with his innate feelings of "this is all I'm good for/I deserve no better"? It seems to me that DD asked him, as an Order member, to do this because he'd be the most believable person. And, Remus, being a good soldier, accepts his assignment. Debbie: Lupin commented somewhere in OOP that he was of limited use to the Order because he was a werewolf. One of his jobs was probably to keep up Sirius' spirits. That job disappeared at the end of OOP. Chances are that he leapt at the opportunity to take on the werewolf assignment. It made him useful, and helped get his mind off the fact that the last link to the good old days was gone. I think his withdrawal was a grief reaction which caused him to fall back on his old defenses. Marianne: I guess the subtext was too subterranean for me to see ;-). Your earlier point about Lupin not being one to open up about his feelings is well-taken. However, that's a double-edged sword. From my perspective, he doesn't want to say outright that he's not interested because he doesn't want to hurt Tonks by that kind of rejection. Debbie: There are some hints, for example Molly's behavior. Tonks evidently has confided in Molly (she is there when Harry arrives at the Burrow) and she made several efforts to bring them together. Surely she would have told Molly if Lupin had told her he didn't return her feelings, and if she had, Molly wouldn't have kept trying to bring them together. Lupin says in the hospital wing that he'd explained his reasons "a million times" -- if he really didn't care for Tonks surely he would have told her the truth at some point instead of repeating the same old excuses. And when Harry asks Lupin about Tonks' changed patronus, "Lupin took his time chewing his turkey and swallowing" [while he thought of something to say, then finally came up with] "'Sometimes . . . a great shock . . . an emotional upheaval . . .'", a statement that I believe is the source of Harry's mistaken assumption that Tonks was in love with Sirius. In light of your comments, I can see how the clues were susceptible to multiple interpretation. But interpretation may also depend on one's mindset; deeply buried beneath my cold, analytical exterior lies a closet romantic. To tell the truth, I much preferred this to the teen romances, which I found rather comical whether or not they were intended that way. Marianne: I guess I'm not convinced that Lupin is suffering under the burden of deciding that he's not deserving of being loved. Debbie: Perhaps his ailment is better described as a belief that he's too dangerous to be loved. I don't think he believes it so much as he uses it as a self-defense mechanism. And If he doesn't allow himself to become entangled, he won't suffer as he did when his friends died. Debbie who can't remember the origin of the quote "it is better to have loved and lost than never to have loved at all" [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From katmac at katmac.cncdsl.com Tue Jan 10 02:42:31 2006 From: katmac at katmac.cncdsl.com (lagattalucianese) Date: Tue, 10 Jan 2006 02:42:31 -0000 Subject: Let's talk about Lupin - True Love at Last? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146180 > ... > > It is clear to me that they not only are both in love with each > other, but made for each other. > > Tonks_op > La Gatta Lucianese: Well, you certainly ought to know! ;D And now to address another issue that you raised: > > Let me suggest that being a metamorphmagus might not be the > most "normal" thing to be in the block where Tonks grew up either. > So they may have some early childhood events in common here. Tonks > is one of the few women Lupin could ever be with, because like James > and Sirius she can transform with him each month. > :a Gatta Lucianese: Lupin mentions that his fellow Marauders transformed with him once they mastered how to become animagi (PoA.18), and because Sirius and James were such large animals, they were able to keep Lupin under control when he was in werewolf form. Lupin says he was no danger to them in animal form, because werewolves are only a threat to humans; indeed, we see him actually bite Sirius in dog form, with apparently no ill effects (PoA.20). Does the same apply to a metamorphmagus who transforms into an animal? If so, I fail to see how Lupin could be a danger to Tonks, even when he Changed. On a subject that comes up in the HPL: How long does Lupin remain a werewolf each month? I should think it would only be for, at most, a 245-hour period, when the moon is actually full. Could it possibly be only during the night of the full moon, or even from moonrise to moonset/daybreak, whichever comes first? From horridporrid03 at yahoo.com Tue Jan 10 02:56:01 2006 From: horridporrid03 at yahoo.com (horridporrid03) Date: Tue, 10 Jan 2006 02:56:01 -0000 Subject: Humanity, Kant, Caricatures, and Draco (was Re: Real child abuse) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146181 > >>Betsy Hp: > > I'm really uncomfortable with that sort of philosophy. Rather > > than using rules fairly applied to everybody, some rules are > > made for one sort of person and other rules are made for another > > sort. So, Draco deserves to be physically tortured because of > > who he is. But Neville should never be challanged because of > > who he is. Hagrid is allowed to physically endanger his > > students. Snape is not allowed to emotionally endanger his. > >>Nora: > > What Betsy proposes here is very Kantian: rules are rules and they > apply perfectly equally to everyone. Betsy Hp: Point of clarity: that's a bit of an extreme version of what I was saying. Though I will also say that basing your rules *entirely* on situation and the character of those involved is another extreme. I'm betting JKR's going for the more complex and harder to define middle. Rules are for everyone, and a good person applies them to everyone. (McGonagall as an example of good; Snape as an example of bad.) However, some rules are wrong, and a good person knows when to break them. (Harry as an example of good; Percy as an example of bad.) It's up to the individual to figure out which statement applies, when. Though I will say no rules whatsoever seems to be a pretty bad thing all around. (Umbridge and Voldemort are good examples of the evils of chaos. I can't think of any examples of "good chaos".) > >>Nora: > > And her [JKR's] morality really *is* quite situational and > considers character as a fundamental issue. I'd say yes, some > things are okay when done by some people and not by others, thanks > to the context. > Correct motivation matters a great deal, for one thing (and we can > use Kant there, for sure). Methods, too. > However, what sets this apart from the DEs is that a different set > of criteria is used, based on people's character and actions > rather than any abstract blood quality. > Betsy Hp: I think rather than saying "rules are rules" I'd say, humans are humans. And if someone is trying to make the argument that sarcasm is cruel enough to be labeled abuse when used against a child, it's rather strange to turn around and say bouncing a child against a stone floor is *not* abuse. In order to make that argument with any sort of sincerity you'd have to show that the bounced child either doesn't feel pain, or is somehow so wrong in essentials they actually deserve to be treated so brutally. (And remember, we're coming from the standpoint that sarcasm is too brutal for the average child. So we're talking a *massive* amount of brutality here.) Either way, to lower the bar so drastically calls for some sort of moral compromise. e.g. The bounced child isn't quite as human as the other children. (It's interesting that Draco is turned into a ferret before he's tortured by Fake!Moody; his humanity is literally taken away.) I have no idea if this is Kantian or not (My Philosophy 101 class is safely ensconsed in the long, long ago ) but I think that sort of treatment for *any* child, no matter the character, is wrong. At least in Potterverse. Because I think JKR thinks along similar lines. All of her children, even the Slytherins, are human, even if our protaganist doesn't want to see them as such. Just look at how the bouncing incident is played out. The attack is against Draco, Harry's school nemesis. It's done by the incredibly cool new professor, beloved of the Gryffindors (Fake! Moody is praised by the twins and Lee immediately following the attack), who soon becomes Harry's champion. And it comes on the heels of Draco throwing a hex at Harry's turned back. It seems perfectly acceptable to cheer Fake!Moody on and see McGonagall as a bit of a spoil sport. But by the end of GoF, the scene comes across as something very different. For one, Moody isn't a cool professor and he's certainly no champion of Harry. He's one of the more fervent Death Eaters we've met so far (Bellatrix's loyalty combined with an ability to create and follow a plan), and he was an integral part of a plan to kill Harry. He didn't target Draco because of Harry; he targeted Draco because of Lucius. (Fake!Moody certainly has no problems with attacking someone whose back is turned. And interestingly enough, one of the last acts of magic in GoF has some of the "good guys" attacking from behind. So much for Death Eater character lessons.) And the attack isn't stopped by the biased Snape, it's stopped by McGonagall, who is generally incredibly fair-minded. Even if she were to show a bias, it wouldn't be *for* a Slytherin. (And McGonagall seems horrified by what Fake!Moody's doing.) In one of his posts, Lupinlore suggested that JKR giggled her way through writing this particular scene. I'm not sure that's true. I can't really see her laughing at a Death Eater taking his anger out on a child. And Draco's reactions, once McGonagall restores his humanity to him, are rather dignified. He's described as being in pain, but he doesn't moan or shriek as he did in CoS. Instead he faces Fake!Moody with quiet defiance, in a rather Harry-like manner, calling on his father as Harry calls on Dumbledore. I don't think JKR is Roald Dahl. Very few of her characters are full out caricatures. Draco certainly doesn't behave like a caricature in this scene. I think to try and judge this scene in a cartoonish way, to see Draco as less than human, is to misjudge the series, and possibly miss one of JKR big points. *Harry* sees Draco as a caricature, I think. Or at least, he tries to. And he tries to see Slytherin House as a house without virtue. But I don't think this is how JKR wants him to remain. It's a point of view she's deliberately having him grow out of. At least, that's how I see it. Betsy Hp, who tried to tie this in to the House points in PS/SS but thought that would get way too confusing -- or at least, she was confused. From richter at ridgenet.net Tue Jan 10 01:18:51 2006 From: richter at ridgenet.net (richter_kuymal) Date: Tue, 10 Jan 2006 01:18:51 -0000 Subject: Nagini? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146182 Sonja wrote: > Nagini is a viper, and based on the description (diamond > pattern and about twelve feet long) is probably a type of King > Cobra. According to my sources that species is the longest known > viper: > > http://www.szgdocent.org/resource/rr/c-cking.htm Carol responds: > I also agree that she's a viper, probably more than > ordinarily poisonous . Somewhere (is it in HBP?) she's > described as being a "venomous green," which struck me as I > read it as resembling both the basilisk in CoS (also deadly > and magical) and the Avada Kedavra curse. That doesn't match > well with the diamond pattern described in (IIRC) the first > chapter of GoF, PAR writes: Ah, but it could. There IS a snake that fits the diamond pattern, the venomous green, AND the deadly viper role in RL. It's the snake known as the "Mohave green" a large, highly aggressive Rattlesnake native to the western deserts of the United States. http://www.wildherps.com/species/C.scutulatus.html http://www.vtc.net/~buffalo/mojave.html http://www.digitalprocessing.net/gallery/026snake.jpg NO the JPG is NOT a bad photo. The snakes actually CAN come in that vivid a green color. They are considered one of the most dangerous of the rattlesnakes because of their extreme toxic venom. And they don't always "rattle". A magical version of such a snake would be deadly indeed. Perhaps JKR saw a photo of one in "most venomous snakes". PAR who lives in an area where these snakes can be found. From nrenka at yahoo.com Tue Jan 10 03:21:18 2006 From: nrenka at yahoo.com (nrenka) Date: Tue, 10 Jan 2006 03:21:18 -0000 Subject: Humanity, Kant, Caricatures, and Draco (was Re: Real child abuse) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146183 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "horridporrid03" wrote: > Betsy Hp: > Point of clarity: that's a bit of an extreme version of what I was > saying. My pardon; I thought it was implied in the phrasing, and the extreme version actually is what Kant argues for. > Though I will also say that basing your rules *entirely* on > situation and the character of those involved is another extreme. I don't think she's working entirely from situation, but I think she's working with rules which absolutely cannot be separated from character and motivation. I think the motivations of the characters make a world, a giant heaping massive world of difference. To answer a tangential question, I think this is why JKR finds Draco a negative character (mostly, if you think about the combination of how he's presented and her comments about him in the past) but Ginny delightful (absolutely unquestionable from comments), when they do some things which some listies have argued are basically the same. We-the-readers don't have to agree with that, but it may well come out solidly enough in the results that disagreeing is banging your head against the textual reality. > I'm betting JKR's going for the more complex and harder to define > middle. Rules are for everyone, and a good person applies them to > everyone. (McGonagall as an example of good; Snape as an example of > bad.) However, some rules are wrong, and a good person knows when > to break them. (Harry as an example of good; Percy as an example of > bad.) It's up to the individual to figure out which statement > applies, when. Though I will say no rules whatsoever seems to be a > pretty bad thing all around. (Umbridge and Voldemort are good > examples of the evils of chaos. I can't think of any examples > of "good chaos".) I find there to be a few too many cases where, again, it's the motivation and not the rule in and of itself is important. Or in other words, the rule as an abstract has to interact with the specific situation to determine the correct course of action. And that's likely to result in the kind of 'skewed' writing which JKR does seem to indulge in. In fact, I find it hard to go through and list the concrete rules which are supposed to be applied to everyone by the good people, because we seem to have more of a way of acting presented than principles for action. Emotion and heart over calculated intellect. (Dan, are you listening?) > I think rather than saying "rules are rules" I'd say, humans are > humans. And if someone is trying to make the argument that sarcasm > is cruel enough to be labeled abuse when used against a child, it's > rather strange to turn around and say bouncing a child against a > stone floor is *not* abuse. I wouldn't argue that the latter situation isn't unpleasant. However, what certainly plays into how JKR constructs and plays the scene are the motivations of the characters involved and why exactly what is happening *is* happening to them. The Draco situation is double-layered, and doesn't come out cleanly at all, because of two factors. It's Barty on a nasty personal vendetta, we get from the re- read--but it's still Draco instigating and attacking from behind. That means (for me at least) there is this undercurrent to the scene the second read-through, but the urge to indulge in Schadenfreude isn't eliminated because the instigation remains and is not mitigated in any way. I think it's possible to read the scene that way; it's not the kind of straightforward funny which some of the characters find it as it happens, and while we may end up pitying Draco, there are limits on it. > In order to make that argument with any sort of sincerity you'd > have to show that the bounced child either doesn't feel pain, or is > somehow so wrong in essentials they actually deserve to be treated > so brutally. Interpersonal comparison of emotion and utility is a no-no, or so I always get told by my social science type friends. But again, I think the specifics around each situation make the world of difference. > And interestingly enough, one of the last acts of magic in GoF has > some of the "good guys" attacking from behind. In response to yet another provocation. I think that degree of instigation *does* matter, even through JKR does also paint the violent response as not intelligent, in many cases. Why does instigation matter so much? It seems to have to do with the skepticism towards institutions and the glorification of the individual. -Nora longs for the free time to crank through some of this stuff again From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Tue Jan 10 03:42:56 2006 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Tue, 10 Jan 2006 03:42:56 -0000 Subject: Did JKR crossed out "losing powers" ending?/ Stephen Fry interview with JKR Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146184 Hmmm, this an excerpt from December 11, 2005 interview ( or whenever it was typed). Do you guys think that this implies that the type of ending where Harry loses his powers and leaving WW is not going to happen? I certainly hope so personally. Although maybe it just implies that Harry losing his powers and leaving WW won't happen - maybe he would stay in WW ( THAT I am perfectly OK with :-)) "SF: Now, that's a very good answer to have. I think that one of the current front-running endings - I'm not sure if you're aware of this - as far as the betting goes, is that Harry will finally defeat Voldemort at the expense of all his own powers, and he will end by going into the world as an ordinary Muggle. [JKR gasps theatrically] Which is an extraordinary idea. JKR: It's a good ending. SF: It is a good ending! You can borrow it if you like. JKR: And be sued for plagiarism by about 13 million children. SF: This is your problem, isn't it? You're not allowed to read anything... JKR [chuckling]: No, I'm not." Alla From GAP5685 at AOL.com Tue Jan 10 04:48:44 2006 From: GAP5685 at AOL.com (gwen_of_the_oaks) Date: Tue, 10 Jan 2006 04:48:44 -0000 Subject: Is Tonks clumsy or not? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146185 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "ginny343" wrote: > > But what happened with her being clumsy? I felt that was a > major part of her character development in OoP and I don't remember > seeing any clumsiness in HBP. > > Well, its not much but: HPB American hardcover, pg 340: At the dinner table in the Burrow Ron looks to pass Fleur gravy and: ... "Gravy, Fleur?" In his eagerness to help her, he knocked the gravy boat flying; Bill waved his wand and the gravy soared up in the air and returned meekly to the boat. "You are as bad as zat Tonks," said Fleur to Ron, when she had finished kissing Bill in thanks. "She is always knocking - " "I invited dear Tonks to come along today," said Mrs. Weasley, ... So apparently, Tonks is still clumsy enough for Fleur to notice. Gwen From Nanagose at aol.com Tue Jan 10 05:34:15 2006 From: Nanagose at aol.com (spotsgal) Date: Tue, 10 Jan 2006 05:34:15 -0000 Subject: SHIP Tonks/Lupin, was Re: Let's talk about Lupin - True Love at Last? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146186 > Tonks_op: > And I don't think that Lupin is trying to let her down gently. I > think he is just as much in love with her as she is with him. Tonks > is not a stupid woman, she would know if a man was in love with her > or not. Christina: We can sit here and debate Lupin's character for hours, but the only *canon* that we see of his feelings for Tonks are a "million" refusals and one incident of holding hands. And that just doesn't convince me that he's madly in love with her. The other relationships in HBP are clued in advance (as in, before HBP). Ginny has always had a crush on Harry. Ron was jealous of Krum and Hermione made it pretty clear that she had wished Ron had asked her to the Yule Ball. Fleur "eyes Bill with great interest" in GoF. I also don't think a woman needs to be stupid to make a mistake in judging whether or not a man is in love with her. Especially when we're talking about a quiet and secretive man like Lupin, and especially when we're talking about a woman as young as Tonks. One who, I might add, has a demanding career that required three years of (what I'm sure must have been) intensive training. I tend to doubt that she found very much time to get relationship experience. > Tonks_op: > I think there are plenty of clues that the adult members of the > Order know that Lupin and Tonks were dating. Christina: All of your examples are within HBP. I mean, obviously Tonks was pursuing Lupin, we hear her say it at the end, but that doesn't mean that Lupin had romantic feelings for her. Because the clues aren't really for the fact that they're "dating," just for the fact that Tonks is pursuing Lupin and he's saying no. It also doesn't mean that the ship was clued for in advance. And it also doesn't mean that they're a good couple, however much Molly might think so. > Tonks_op: > Now why would they be ideal for each other? Let me count the ways. > > Let me suggest that being a metamorphmagus might not be the > most "normal" thing to be in the block where Tonks grew up either. > So they may have some early childhood events in common here. Tonks > is one of the few women Lupin could ever be with, because like James > and Sirius she can transform with him each month. Christina: I highly, highly doubt that Tonks could be with Lupin each month. As others have said, Sirius and James were OK because they were large enough to restrain Lupin. Tonks says that she can change her "appearance at will." It doesn't seem like she can change her *form*, the way an Animagus could. NOW, the one single thing that I *have* heard that makes a bit of sense is the fact that they both have identity issues relating to their physical abilities to change (I think Tonks's clumsiness comes from being a tad uncomfortable in her own skin). But that could be a curse as well as a blessing, as Tonks still has free choice over her transformations (and seems to have a casual and positive attitude toward them). I think the two of them bonding over their physical transformations would be like James or Sirius comparing their ability to transform to Lupin's. It absolutely is not the same - one causes unbelievable pain and a loss of one's mind, the other is something that is done for fun and amusement - and I think any comparison is rather flippant and insulting. That's why I find it hard to believe that Lupin and Tonks could bond in that way. A lot of my personal feelings on Lupin/Tonks have to do with age. I don't care about the number of years between them (I don't see anything wrong with a decade or so difference), but I find it interesting that Lupin and Tonks are two people whose ages are almost overstressed in the books. Lupin is in his 30's through the series, but he's constantly being described as ill, exhausted, tired, and shabby. Harry seems to notice more gray in Lupin's hair every time they meet. Lupin is portrayed as being somebody that, in looks at least (and I'd argue in temperament and experience as well), is older than his years. Now think about Tonks. It isn't just that she's in her early 20's. It's that she's *really* in her early twenties. She wears band shirts and has pink hair, she's spunky, and she gives off a distinctive "young" vibe. She's hip, she's cool, she's feisty. She and Lupin might share some political ideals (although I don't think believing in fairness and justice can be really counted as a foundation for a relationship), but while he is actually discussing them at the dinner table in OotP, Tonks is hanging out with the two teenage girls, entertaining them by making faces. I was left scratching my head. When I think about the kind of man that would want a younger woman, I would think of somebody that's maybe looking for a little excitement, a little fun, somebody more interesting and risk-loving than a woman his own age. I think of somebody like Sirius, who is described as acting quite young (which makes sense considering his 12-odd years spent out of commission). In fact, if it weren't for the cousin connection, I would think that Sirius and Tonks would make a much more logical couple than Lupin and Tonks. When I think of the kind of woman that would want an older man, I think of a woman who is maybe a bit fed up with the immature guys her age, somebody looking to settle down with a mature older guy to...I don't know, drink tea with and talk about books. I think of somebody like, say, Hermione. I'm not saying that opposites can't attract, because they certainly can (although research shows that marriages are more successful between people that are somewhat alike). I'm also not saying that the two don't have some wonderful, attractive qualities. Lupin is a great guy. Tonks is a great lady. I like both of their characters very much. I just can't see them together. And I can't see what it is that could sustain their relationship. I think that Lupin, given the choice, would favor a quiet, simple life. I can't help but see Tonks getting bored after about 10 minutes of that. And all of that isn't to say that JKR can't go down the Lupin/Tonks road, because I think she's probably going to. I'm also not saying that two people that are have different personalities and different goals can't fall in love, because they can. I'm just adding in my personal reasons for not seeing the two together, as you gave a few of your reasons for liking the pairing. Christina From finwitch at yahoo.com Tue Jan 10 06:38:35 2006 From: finwitch at yahoo.com (finwitch) Date: Tue, 10 Jan 2006 06:38:35 -0000 Subject: Phineas Nigellus: Witness for Snape? In-Reply-To: <008f01c61575$789622e0$14b2a8c0@rechnerchen> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146187 > > Miles: > There was much consideration whether the portraits would tell e.g. McG about > Dumbledore's secrets. Maybe Phineas won't talk to McG - but Harry? Harry is > different. Harry is somehow the "heir of the Black's" - Sirius was the last > Black, so he owns the second portrait of Phineas - maybe he will see Harry > as part of the family, somehow. Finwitch: There's also the fact that where none would of told Phineas how the 'last of the Blacks', his own great-grandson - died - Harry did. Just because Harry figured it was *right*. (in the end of OOP) Hermione's comment "maybe there was a reason they didn't" made Harry regret it a bit, but what if Dumbledore's reason for not telling Phineas was so that *Harry* would tell Phineas and thus have Phineas owe him a favour? And indeed, as Sirius' godson and all-but-officially-adopted son, Harry IS the heir. As for McGonagall, well -- I doubt she'd bother to *ask* why Dumbledore trusted Snape, and if even she did, she'd expect to get the answer from Dumbledore's portrait, not Phineas'. But Phineas may well tell Harry even if he doesn't ask. Also, it makes me think of the time Sirius was at Hogwarts... He left home at sixteen. Did he even bother going Grimmauld Place that summer? Much easier going to Potters directly from school, wouldn't it? Maybe, after whatever Snape did, and the werewolf-incident which also happened to him at sixteen... Dumbledore had him in his office, and Phineas was to be the messenger. Finwitch From finwitch at yahoo.com Tue Jan 10 07:36:55 2006 From: finwitch at yahoo.com (finwitch) Date: Tue, 10 Jan 2006 07:36:55 -0000 Subject: Real child abuse In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146188 Nora: > And her morality really *is* quite situational and considers > character as a fundamental issue. I'd say yes, some things are okay > when done by some people and not by others, thanks to the context. > Correct motivation matters a great deal, for one thing -- > > However, what sets this apart from the DEs is that a different set of > criteria is used, based on people's character and actions rather than > any abstract blood quality. Finwitch: And I myself agree with situational ethics. Which is why I do not believe that a set of rules defining universal morality that can apply to each and every case can be constructed. Also, about different set of rules -- well, does anyone question the correctness in a family where a 2-year-old is not allowed to so much as touch the laundry-machine and washing powder etc. whereas the child's 15-year-old sibling is expected to do the laundry once a week? I'd bet that BOTH of them would consider it unfair, but... Other sibling-matters: My parents encouraged me to go to movies/parties to the point of giving me money for it whereas they'd forbid my sister the same when she got to that age. However, she tended to want to go *every* weekend whereas I usually didn't wish to go at all... Finwitch From diversity33 at hotmail.com Tue Jan 10 08:30:24 2006 From: diversity33 at hotmail.com (Kath Lane) Date: Tue, 10 Jan 2006 08:30:24 +0000 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Did JKR crossed out "losing powers" ending?/ Stephen Fry int In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146189 It's also an ending copied from Le Guin's "Earthsea" series ... I prefer an ending where it is left ambiguous whether Harry dies or not. There would be speculation for years about whether Harry was really dead or not ... >From: "dumbledore11214" >Reply-To: HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com >To: HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com >Subject: [HPforGrownups] Did JKR crossed out "losing powers" ending?/ >Stephen Fry interview with JKR >Date: Tue, 10 Jan 2006 03:42:56 -0000 > >Hmmm, this an excerpt from December 11, 2005 interview ( or whenever >it was typed). Do you guys think that this implies that the type of >ending where Harry loses his powers and leaving WW is not going to >happen? > >I certainly hope so personally. Although maybe it just implies that >Harry losing his powers and leaving WW won't happen - maybe he would >stay in WW ( THAT I am perfectly OK with :-)) > > >"SF: Now, that's a very good answer to have. I think that one of the >current front-running endings - I'm not sure if you're aware of >this - as far as the betting goes, is that Harry will finally defeat >Voldemort at the expense of all his own powers, and he will end by >going into the world as an ordinary Muggle. [JKR gasps theatrically] >Which is an extraordinary idea. > >JKR: It's a good ending. > >SF: It is a good ending! You can borrow it if you like. > >JKR: And be sued for plagiarism by about 13 million children. > >SF: This is your problem, isn't it? You're not allowed to read >anything... > >JKR [chuckling]: No, I'm not." > > >Alla > > > > From kelleyaynn at yahoo.com Tue Jan 10 13:25:12 2006 From: kelleyaynn at yahoo.com (kelleyaynn) Date: Tue, 10 Jan 2006 13:25:12 -0000 Subject: Did JKR crossed out "losing powers" ending?/ Stephen Fry int In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146190 Kath Lane: > > I prefer an > ending where > it is left ambiguous whether Harry dies or not. There would be speculation > for years > about whether Harry was really dead or not ... Kelleyaynn: Gosh, I hope not. That would be very unsatsifying. After all the years of reading the books, only to have a huge, never revealed cliffhanger. Yuck. I'd like it better if perhaps we are never really sure that Harry is actually the one who kills Voldemort. Perhaps it could be Snape? Or even Neville (which would fit with the prophecy)? But I think it's more likely that we will never be sure the Voldemort is actually gone for good. Evil like that never really dies, it just pops up again in a different form. Kind of like Voldemort took on the mantle from Grindlewald. Kelleyaynn From vuurdame at xs4all.nl Tue Jan 10 14:03:56 2006 From: vuurdame at xs4all.nl (festuco) Date: Tue, 10 Jan 2006 14:03:56 -0000 Subject: Draco & Unforgivables; Krum?; Inflated Aunt vs. Sectumsempera; Sir; Dursleys In-Reply-To: <30317039.1136823472961.JavaMail.administrator@webmail> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146191 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, bawilson at c... wrote: > I still think that the 'person who does magic late in life' will > be Uncle Vernon, if only because it would be such a kick in the > pants for him. > > BAW > That would be fun, true. But I really hope it will be Filch. Imagine being a squib and being the caretaker in a school where everybody is to control and develop that wonderful talent you can never, ever have: magic. No wonder he hates students. I think if he would learn magic, it would make such a positive difference in his life. Gerry From miamibarb at BellSouth.net Tue Jan 10 14:35:50 2006 From: miamibarb at BellSouth.net (Barb Roberts) Date: Tue, 10 Jan 2006 09:35:50 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Let's talk about Lupin In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <36e934b2c3309061b197dfc83c1cc89d@bellsouth.net> No: HPFGUIDX 146192 > > Marianne: > > But, Lupin is still in contact with other Order members.? He knows > his werewolf assignment is not a sentence for the rest of his life, > even though he sounds bitter about it to Harry.? His coping > mechanisms as you've described them would make more sense to me if > Lupin knew that, indeed, this was to be his life from now on- stuck > with the werewolves forever. If (?) Greyback was captured in the Battle of Hogwarts (someone did petrify him), then it follows that Lupin's assignment may be altered. Easier perhaps? I don't find anything in the book that states whether Greybeck was caught or or not, but if he's been captured that the werewolves might become more receptive to Lupin's message, and maybe Lupin will have a safer life...eventually, anyway. Like Afro-American civil rights leader's lives today as compared with their lives fifty or so years ago. Barbara [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From belviso at attglobal.net Tue Jan 10 14:58:39 2006 From: belviso at attglobal.net (sistermagpie) Date: Tue, 10 Jan 2006 14:58:39 -0000 Subject: Real child abuse In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146193 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "finwitch" wrote: > > Nora: > > > And her morality really *is* quite situational and considers > > character as a fundamental issue. I'd say yes, some things are okay > > when done by some people and not by others, thanks to the context. > > Correct motivation matters a great deal, for one thing -- > > > > However, what sets this apart from the DEs is that a different set of > > criteria is used, based on people's character and actions rather than > > any abstract blood quality. > > Finwitch: > > And I myself agree with situational ethics. Which is why I do not > believe that a set of rules defining universal morality that can apply > to each and every case can be constructed. Magpie: I believe in situational ethics as well, but I don't think that always explains everything going on in canon. I mean, there's situational ethics and then there's just looking at the world as whatever you do must be justified and whatever that other person did was wrong and you're quite righteous for seeing so. That's partly why I think it's significant that rule-breaking *in itself* is held up as the mark of a good person in canon, imo. Knowing when you have to do something wrong can easily become rationalizing everything you do that might be wrong. Also sometimes it's not really a case of situational ethics being presented but one that's much more common in schools, where a "good kid" who does something that might be considered wrong has his actions described in an affectionate way, where as a "bad kid" who does the same thing is judged in a negative way, and their actions are therefore judged differently, and that's just a double standard that both good kids and bad kids recognize. -m From klano at hotmail.com Tue Jan 10 08:14:41 2006 From: klano at hotmail.com (Kevin Lano) Date: Tue, 10 Jan 2006 08:14:41 +0000 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Did JKR crossed out "losing powers" ending?/ Stephen Fry int In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146194 Alla provided this interview snippet: >Hmmm, this an excerpt from December 11, 2005 interview ( or whenever >it was typed). > >"SF: Now, that's a very good answer to have. I think that one of the >current front-running endings - I'm not sure if you're aware of >this - as far as the betting goes, is that Harry will finally defeat >Voldemort at the expense of all his own powers, and he will end by >going into the world as an ordinary Muggle. [JKR gasps theatrically] >Which is an extraordinary idea. > >JKR: It's a good ending. > >SF: It is a good ending! You can borrow it if you like. > >JKR: And be sued for plagiarism by about 13 million children. It's also an ending plagiarised from Ursula Le Guin. I prefer an ending where it is not clear if Harry dies or not (one can imagine the "Is Harry really dead" debates that could last for years ...) Kevin From briandumby at yahoo.com Tue Jan 10 16:40:00 2006 From: briandumby at yahoo.com (brian dumby) Date: Tue, 10 Jan 2006 08:40:00 -0800 (PST) Subject: Nagini etymology In-Reply-To: <1136868928.2350.60298.m26@yahoogroups.com> Message-ID: <20060110164000.41021.qmail@web35907.mail.mud.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 146195 Well have been seeing these messages for sometime and I thought about sharing my knowledge about this "Nagini" name. Yes, as people have mentioned the boa and Nagini are totally different. Boa is a non-venomous constrictor while Nagini is a venomous cobra. Nagini is a name derived from Indian word Nag (meaning cobra) and the suffix -ini denoting the female of the species. But cobras are far from green... generally they are brown-black with a sheen. So obviously JKR has picked up an ugly looking green colour, added the diamond patterned tail (chracteristic of diamond-backed rattle snake or a diamondback water snake) and christened it with an Indian name. And also made it 12 feet long. King cobra - a distinct venomous snake (different from the normal cobra) is the longest venomous snake known around with lengths of 12 feet or more. Sure there are other long snakes but mostly in the the non-venomous category like pythons, anaconda etc. BD From foxmoth at qnet.com Tue Jan 10 17:50:08 2006 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Tue, 10 Jan 2006 17:50:08 -0000 Subject: /ESE!lupin questions (long) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146196 Christina: The only way that I can think of for Harry's view of Bella and Lupin to be partially obstructed is if Lupin and Bella both had their backs to Harry, with Lupin standing behind Bellatrix, so that the top of her body and a sliver of her side was all Harry could see. I'll grant you the plausibility of that scenario, but then Harry's view of Sirius would also have been blocked, and we know that he could see Sirius quite well. Pippin: Bella could be standing sideways to Sirius, a sensible posture for a duelist, since it presents a smaller target to the enemy. Sirius faces her full on, drawing her fire, not because he's goaded to recklessness as Harry thinks but because if she pivots, she'll have a clear shot at Harry, who is grappling with Neville up on the steps and unable to defend himself. Lupin could be facing the dais with his back to Harry. Harry wouldn't be able to see Bella's wand arm. He couldn't see what Lupin was doing. A jet of light traveling upward might pass below Bella's angled shoulder or beneath her billowing sleeve while hidden from Harry by Lupin's body. It works fine if Harry is higher up the steps than I thought originally (and you deserve a LOON badge* for working that out), because then he is looking over the top of Lupin's head to see Sirius. As for the panting breath, Harry's been running and fighting for quite a while, regardless of whether he jumped down one step or several. Christina: Harry misinterprets what he sees loads of times, but I've found that his errors tend to be of the interpretive sort, not the factual sort. Pippin: Um, there's the time he thought he'd heard Slughorn was going to teach DADA. And the time he said he hadn't thought of Voldemort before he thought of the dementors in Lupin's class. And the time, in the same book, that he put his stuff in a compartment, got off the train to say farewell to the Weasleys, got back on and it didn't register that he'd already chosen a compartment (so it's no great mystery how Lupin found him.) Also it didn't register that the full moon had already risen the night that Lupin transformed. I would have no problem believing that it didn't register that he hadn't actually seen the spell leave Bella's wand. > Pippin: > I don't think Dumbledore discussed the prophecy with Sirius at all. > Dumbledore says that the blame lies with him and him alone that > Harry did not know that Voldemort might try to lure him to the DoM. Christina: Which also makes sense without ESE!Lupin, considering the fact that Dumbledore is the one regulating the amount of information that Harry gets. Pippin: James might have discussed the prophecy with Lupin and Sirius. But did James and Lily know the prophecy was stored at the DoM? I don't see a 'need to know' there. Their names and the Longbottoms' are not on the label, so they wouldn't have been able to retrieve it. Apparently the people that the prophecies are about aren't automatically informed about them -- that seems to be up to the person to whom the prophecy was made (and any eavesdroppers). I don't know what the Ministry does with those thousands of prophecies -- but it's canon that only a few people know about them. Voldemort couldn't find *anyone* to tell him what was beyond the door to the Department of Mysteries until he'd sprung Rookwood from Azkaban. Actually, if I were studying prophecies, I'd probably be very interested in the ones that the subjects never knew of, because I'd want to know if they came true of themselves. Perhaps they can be handled safely once the subjects are dead. Arthur says he has no idea what Bode gets up to -- so the existence of the Hall itself is secret. What Dumbledore meant by 'we' was probably Our Side, referring to himself and his contacts within the DoM, but they are probably the last people he would want to know that Voldemort was now after that prophecy. As he tells Harry, very few people can resist the kind of temptation Voldemort can offer. The Order is guarding the outer door to the Department of Mysteries, so there's no need for them to know what Voldemort is after inside. They might be told nothing except that there's a weapon at the Ministry he's trying to steal. That might be the 'official' version of the information Snape brought back from Voldemort's camp, ie, what Voldemort wanted his double agent to tell Dumbledore. Voldemort knows Dumbledore will beef up security around the prophecy, and he has plans to subvert the guard (that's what happened to Podmore.) Before starting their tale about the 'weapon' Lupin and Sirius exchange a fleeting glance, which suggests that they know something the others don't. Eventually, it's Lupin who brings the conversation to a close: "There are dangers involved of which you can have no idea, any of you...I think Molly's right, Sirius. We've said enough." (Lupin, OOP ch. 5) The 'any of you' makes it sound like he is the source of at least some of Sirius's information. I know the immediate context is whether Fred and George are old enough to join the Order, but JKR is masterful at manipulating the context to change the meaning. The canon that no one else in the Order knows that they are guarding a prophecy is Dumbledore's insistence that he is the only one who could have warned Harry that Voldemort would try to lure him to the Department of Mysteries. If the Order knew that Voldemort was trying to steal a prophecy about Harry, then any of them could have warned him, despite Dumbledore's wishes. They would certainly have started treating him differently, as they do in HBP, if they already suspected he was the Chosen One. Christina: They were considered evidence for ESE!Sirius, but those suspicions turned out to be wrong. And yes, we should absolutely accept Peter's confession. He wasn't killed straight-out (thanks to Lupin, btw, who encouraged exploring the facts before taking action); Peter was asked to defend himself, to answer Lupin's questions. Hermione, who has always been a supporter of fairness and truth, interjects her own questions. Sirius asks Peter plainly, about being a spy, "Do you deny it?" Peter could have said yes and continued to argue, but he didn't. Instead, he made excuses for his behavior. And we now know that Peter can and has gone to Voldemort of his own volition simply to protect himself. Pippin: To protect himself from his old friend, ESE!Lupin, who would otherwise kill him. If Peter could be bullied into betraying his friends, why is it far-fetched to think he was bullied into confessing? "DON'T LIE!" bellowed Black."YOU'D BEEN PASSING INFORMATION TO HIM FOR A YEAR BEFORE LILY AND JAMES DIED! YOU WERE HIS SPY!" As Peter might say himself, what was the good of refusing him? If Peter is not the spy, then one of the other two is. But Lupin clearly won't support him against Sirius whom he embraced immediately, before questioning Peter at all, and accusing Lupin would only enrage Sirius further, since Sirius is in no mood to believe anything Peter has to say. JKR makes it clear at once that Lupin and Sirius were wrong to want revenge. What isn't clear in PoA but crystallizes later is that they are denying everything the Order stands for to get it. It's understandable in Sirius's case, because he's shown to be unstable. But the whole point of Lupin is that when he's not transformed, he's as sane as can be. And if he does want revenge on Pettigrew, what sort of revenge would he want on the Ministry of Magic, who are forcing his kind into stealing and killing to live? Christina: And HRH don't have to voice prejudices about werewolves for them to exist. It is only by knowing Lupin that the Weasley's have struck down their prejudices about werewolves. Ron reacts in violent fear in the Shack when he first hears that Lupin is a werewolf. Pippin: I don't think I see your point. What matters, in my scenario, is not how the Trio came to realize that werewolves should not be outcasts, but whether the Trio's faith that werewolves are not more untrustworthy than humans could survive a betrayal by the werewolf they trusted most. IMO, ESE!Lupin hasn't done anything that an uncontaminated human with the same character faults wouldn't have done in his shoes. The fight against prejudice should not depend on whether one werewolf is good or bad. For the reader, the message is one that anyone who is serious about defending minority rights has to face. Sometimes those who once were the best and brightest bring disgrace on themselves and manage to fulfill the most derogatory stereotypes about their people while doing it. Lupin's disgrace might mean there's no fairy tale ending for werewolves. But Fenrir has turned a lot of people against them and Umbridge has turned a lot of werewolves against the wizards. It would be unrealistic to show all that bitterness and enmity going away overnight even if Lupin was another Gandhi. I want to see Hermione persist in her efforts to help the WW's outcasts gain their freedom, but I don't see that JKR has to make it easy for her or that there needs to be any more than a better hope of progress at the end of the book. > Pippin: > I agree Peter may not be quite as incompetent as everyone thinks. > But that doesn't turn him into Superspy! Peter, who could fool a > great leglilmens like Dumbledore for at least a year. There's not a > hint anywhere that Peter is good at occlumency. Christina: Well first of all, *somebody* fooled Dumbledore for at least a year, something that has always kind of surprised me because, really, how difficult is it to flush out a spy among a small group of people? Put the Potters in a safe house, tell Sirius, Peter, and Lupin different locations for them, and see which location gets attacked. Simple! Also, do we have any reason to believe that Lupin is any good at Occlumency? Pippin: Yup. That "odd, closed expression" JKR gives him in ch. 14 of PoA. There's also Snape's comment that he can't be asked to fathom the way a werewolf's mind works. Lupin is perhaps too skilled a legilimens to be caught in the way you suggest. He would know when he was being lied to. There's plenty of canon that he seems to be reading people's minds. > Pippin: > He either forgot completely that he was due to transform, or he > deliberately arranged things so that Peter would have a chance to > escape. The real spy couldn't afford to let Peter be questioned by > Dumbledore, could he? Christina: - Lupin saw that somebody that he thought had been dead was actually alive, which has major implications for the happenings of what is arguably the most important event in Lupin's life. Everything he thought he knew up to that point -- wrong! I think it'd be enough to send any normally rational person running for the door. Pippin: It seems to be forgotten that he discussed his history for some time before he transformed. He may have been in a panicked state when he first saw Pettigrew, on the map, but how could he be so rattled that even as he calmly discussed the fine points of being a werewolf and the use of the potion, he didn't remember that he was due to transform and hadn't taken it. It's too big of a leap for me. > Pippin: > > The other DE's might not know him as a werewolf. Voldemort wouldn't > care. He'd probably think it was a fine joke if his pureblood > servants were made to take orders from someone they'd detest even > more than a halfblood, if they only knew. Christina: Also, Lupin has been publicly outed as a werewolf. Even if the DE's hadn't known about his werewolf status way back when, they certainly know about it now, considering it was a scandal at the school that their children attend. I can't see them accepting him into their inner circle enough so that, for example, Bellatrix would so calmly and smoothly take credit for Sirius's death (the triumphant scream). I'd imagine she's be more likely to say, "Huh?" Pippin: The Inner Circle don't all know each other, and despite being not much of a potion maker, Lupin is apparently able to disguise himself well enough that the werewolves he spies on don't know he's associated with Harry Potter. Perhaps he's good at human transfiguration. Bella could know Remus as an underling or rival of Fenrir's, one who couldn't possibly threaten her, without realizing that he's a member of the Inner Circle too. Umbridge's attitude has people confused, but we can see clearly enough from the scene on the tower that the werewolves and the DE's are *allies* and of course they work together. sherry now: For even deeper emotional reasons, because of the resonance with which the marauders story touched my heart, I want there to be one marauder still standing at the end. Standing and happy at last, standing for James and lily and Sirius. Harry needs that, i think. he doesn't need anymore betrayals. One last connection to his parents and Sirius, in the end, when he's all done being a hero who needs to go it alone. Pippin: I'm afraid Harry hasn't got as romantic a view of the Marauders as you do... it seems the more he finds out about what they were like, the less he wants to know. But there are lots of people who knew James, Lily and Sirius in the days of the Order! Moody, Podmore, Hagrid, and Aberforth at least. I'm sure what J and L did for the Order was a lot more thrilling than schoolyard pranks, anyway. > Jen: I think JKR said the series is not primarily a mystery, though. > That's how I read her comment from the TLC/MN interview: > > JKR: There's a theory - this applies to detective novels, and then > Harry, which is not really a detective novel, but it feels like one > sometimes ? that you should not have romantic intrigue in a > detective book. > > Jen: JKR is saying there are elements of a detective story, but it's > not the primary genre and therefore I don't think the series needs > to have the denouement of an unknown spy at the end. Plus JKR > elaborated on the genre she is working primarily from: > > JKR: Yeah, well, I think if you take a step back, in the genre of > writing that I'm working in, almost always the hero must go on > alone. That's the way it is, we all know that, so the question is > when and how, isn't it, if you know anything about the construction > of that kind of plot. > > Jen: She does mix genres, but the claim of a primary genre would be > the best guide to the ending. Pippin: Maybe I should have said the resolution of the mystery subplot is integral rather than essential to the resolution of the storyline as a whole. I agree the books aren't primarily detective stories. Harry is usually focussed on something other than solving a crime, and he usually *doesn't* solve it. But it may be a mark of his adulthood, that he finally twigs to the culprit himself, as JKR says, doing it alone, instead having the villain catch him unawares. Suspecting that Draco or Snape was up to something hardly qualifies. JKR continues to talk about clues and red herrings, and to drop hints that things aren't as they seem. It's my guess that the last three books form a single mystery -- the murder of Sirius Black-- and this will have to be solved. She has told us that there was a reason Sirius had to die, and I assume this means that there was both a plot reason and a thematic reason. Pippin *LOON badge - the mark of membership in the League of Overly Obsessed NitpickersChristina: From foxmoth at qnet.com Tue Jan 10 17:54:06 2006 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Tue, 10 Jan 2006 17:54:06 -0000 Subject: Nagini? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146197 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "justcarol67" wrote: > > Sonja wrote: > > Nagini is a viper, and based on the description (diamond > pattern and about twelve feet long) is probably a type of King Cobra. > According to my sources that species is the longest known viper > > > > http://www.szgdocent.org/resource/rr/c-cking.htm > > > > Or she could just be a magical snake, but definitely not the one > Harry set free. > > Carol responds: > I agree that Nagini is not the (apparently) male boa constrictor that > Harry set free, which was probably recaptured by zookeepers as it > attempted to make its way from London to Brazil. Good luck with that > one, Amigo!) > Pippin: I can't find the reference, but years ago I read an interview with JKR in which she said the one thing she would change if she could is that she didn't know when she wrote PS/SS that Boa Constrictors weren't poisonous. So maybe the boa from PS/SS was originally intended to be Voldemort's familiar in later books, and JKR had to change it. Pippin From bartl at sprynet.com Tue Jan 10 18:57:56 2006 From: bartl at sprynet.com (Bart Lidofsky) Date: Tue, 10 Jan 2006 13:57:56 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Real child abuse In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <43C403B4.1090001@sprynet.com> No: HPFGUIDX 146198 sistermagpie wrote: > I believe in situational ethics as well, but I don't think that > always explains everything going on in canon. I mean, there's > situational ethics and then there's just looking at the world as > whatever you do must be justified and whatever that other person did > was wrong and you're quite righteous for seeing so. Bart: One must understand that "situational ethics" or "moral relativism" is based on misconception that situations are single-pointed. In fact, any given decision will have, in the long run, an infinite number of consequences; some good, and some bad. Regardless of what your moral principles are, any given action is likely to support some, and violate others. We just need to determine which factors have more weight. Western culture is derived from two, often contradictory sources: Greco-Roman and Judeo-Christian. Much dramatic conflict in literature is a moral person caught in a contradiction. For example, in the HP series, the Greco-Roman part of our culture tells us to obey the rules, respect authority, and tell the truth. The Judeo-Christian part says that we should give up our own immediate needs for the greater good. In children's literature, these are usually resolved based on the lesson the writer wishes to teach. In the case of Harry Potter, it seems to be 3-fold: 1) When your personal duty conflicts with your duty towards humanity, choose the latter. 2) Accept any punishment one receives from failing your personal duty as part of the task. 3) If those in authority deserve their authority, they will recognize what you have done, remove the punishment, and aware you accordingly. Bart From krystynka at yahoo.com Tue Jan 10 18:33:34 2006 From: krystynka at yahoo.com (Krycha Kowalska) Date: Tue, 10 Jan 2006 10:33:34 -0800 (PST) Subject: Nagini etymology + snakes' lifespan? In-Reply-To: <20060110164000.41021.qmail@web35907.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20060110183334.77616.qmail@web33107.mail.mud.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 146199 brian dumby wrote: "Well have been seeing these messages for sometime and I thought about sharing my knowledge about this "Nagini" name. Yes, as people have mentioned the boa and Nagini are totally different. Boa is a non-venomous constrictor while Nagini is a venomous cobra. Nagini is a name derived from Indian word Nag (meaning cobra) and the suffix -ini denoting the female of the species." Krystyna: In one of the stories of "Jungle Book" by Rudyard Kipling there is a couple of cobras - Nag (male) and Nagaina (female). Both deadly dangerous, but the female more evil and vicious than her husband. brian: "But cobras are far from green... generally they are brown-black with a sheen. So obviously JKR has picked up an ugly looking green colour, added the diamond patterned tail (chracteristic of diamond-backed rattle snake or a diamondback water snake) and christened it with an Indian name. And also made it 12 feet long. King cobra - a distinct venomous snake (different from the normal cobra) is the longest venomous snake known around with lengths of 12 feet or more. Sure there are other long snakes but mostly in the the non-venomous category like pythons, anaconda etc. Krystyna: Now to my question. What do we know about average lifespan of snakes? I wonder if Voldemort isn't risking too much by placing precious piece of his soul into animal with its natural limitations. Or is Nagini now living according to human rather than snake's lifespan - I mean, bearing Voldemort's soul, she is no longer prone to snake aging process?? Hope you will got my message, even with my poor English. Krystyna From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Tue Jan 10 19:24:17 2006 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Tue, 10 Jan 2006 19:24:17 -0000 Subject: Mrs. Figg (Was: Dursleys) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146200 Gerry wrote: > That [having Uncle Vernon perform magic] would be fun, true. But I really hope it will be Filch. Imagine being a squib and being the caretaker in a school where everybody is to control and develop that wonderful talent you can never, ever have: magic. No wonder he hates students. I think if he would learn magic, it would make such a positive difference in his life. Carol responds: First, I think the chances of having the arch-Muggle, Uncle Vernon, perform magic, are absolute zero. JKR has told us over and over again that the Dursleys are Muggles, and if "Dudley is just Dudley" (interview) and Aunt Petunia has never and will never perform magic (website), then Uncle Vernon certainly never will. At least I hope not. (How could he? He's gotten angry plenty of times and nothing magical has happened, and he'd never so much as touch a wand, considering such things dangerous if not contaminated. And of course he doesn't know any spells. Filch, I agree, is a better candidate, being a Squib and constantly in the presence of magic. And he certainly *wants* to learn magic, as evidenced by the Qwikspell course. But he's also unpredictable and his ethics are questionable. He believes in harsh punishment, even torture, for students, and he admired Umbridge. And he's at Hogwarts, while Harry won't be there, at least not for the majority of the book. Mrs. Figg, however, is also a Squib (and like Filch, fits the "late in life" requirement), and like him would know how to point a wand and shout an incantation. As Harry's neighbor who keeps an eye on him, and as a member of the Order, she may well be involved in the defense of the Dursleys if 4 Privet Drive is attacked in the early hours of Harry's birthday, as I expect it will be. That would certainly qualify as "dire circumstances," or whatever the exact wording of the interview was, and the adrenalin rush could trigger the residual magic in her (the same residual magic that enables both her and Filch to talk to cats). Somehow, I can't see her hitting a Death Eater with a sack of catfood cans and surviving. But if she catches a wand that someone has lost after being hit with Expelliarmus. . . . At any rate, I like Mrs. Figg's spunk and she's in the books (and the Order) for a reason. I think we'll find out what it is quite early in Book 7 in the Battle of Privet Drive. Does anyone agree? If not, what do you think her role in Book 7 will be? Could it have something to do with Mundungus Fletcher? Carol From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Tue Jan 10 20:25:43 2006 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Tue, 10 Jan 2006 20:25:43 -0000 Subject: Nagini etymology + snakes' lifespan? In-Reply-To: <20060110183334.77616.qmail@web33107.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146201 > Krystyna wrote: > Now to my question. What do we know about average lifespan of snakes? I wonder if Voldemort isn't risking too much by placing precious piece of his soul into animal with its natural limitations. Or is Nagini now living according to human rather than snake's lifespan - I mean, bearing Voldemort's soul, she is no longer prone to snake aging process?? Carol responds: Maybe magical snakes, like magical rats, have longer lifespans than their nonmagical counterparts, so she might already have a lifespan as long as a human's or much longer. The Basilisk, for example, lived for a thousand years before Harry killed it with the Sword of Gryffindor. And Nagini, as I said in another post, is clearly magical. Her venom has sustaining powers for Baby!mort--though, of course, it would kill anyone else. (Wormtail must have been in terror for his pitiful life every time he had to milk her.) But you may be right about being a Horcrux giving her a still longer lifespan, or even making her virtually immortal until the soul bit within her is destroyed. I expect that she'll die by Harry's hand using the Sword of Gryffindor, like the Basilisk before her, and the Horcrux will "die" with her, in which case, her lifespan will be a dead issue, pun intended. If being a Horcrux does grant her something like the immortality of Tolkien's Elves (subject to death in battle but not to old age or disease), that might explain how Voldemort can possess her without destroying her life force (as he did Quirrell's and those of the small creatures he possessed at other times). It would also be an argument against deliberately creating a human Horcrux, especially Harry. Why would he want to make his archnemesis or a potential rival immortal? (I don't think a Horcrux can be created accidentally, as it requires a spell.) I had thought that the mortality of both human beings and living creatures like Nagini would be a reason not to use one as a Horcrux (most of the others seem to be made of incorruptible gold) because the Horcrux would be destroyed when the creature or person died, but if you're right, I can understand Voldy wanting his dear Nagini, the only living being he cares about (rather like Filch and Mrs. Norris), sharing his immortality with him. But the argument against deliberately creating a *human* Horcrux still applies. Carol, wondering how Voldemort expects to protect his still mortal body against aging since it's only his soul that's protected by the Horcruxes From katmac at katmac.cncdsl.com Tue Jan 10 20:26:28 2006 From: katmac at katmac.cncdsl.com (lagattalucianese) Date: Tue, 10 Jan 2006 20:26:28 -0000 Subject: Draco & Unforgivables; Krum?; Inflated Aunt vs. Sectumsempera; Sir; Dursleys In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146202 > > That would be fun, true. But I really hope it will be Filch. Imagine > being a squib and being the caretaker in a school where everybody is > to control and develop that wonderful talent you can never, ever have: > magic. No wonder he hates students. I think if he would learn magic, > it would make such a positive difference in his life. > > Gerry > La Gatta Lucianese: Totally cool! And Mrs. Norris will turn out to be part kneazle! They're going to need somebody who's part kneazle at Hogwarts, cause Hermione and Crookshanks are coming up on graduation, and anyway, I think Crookshanks is going to turn out to be R.A.B. in animagus form. He was much too friendly with Sirius to be just a very perceptive cat. Can you just hear Hermione--"I let you sleep in my bed!!!") ;D From ornawn at 013.net Tue Jan 10 20:34:45 2006 From: ornawn at 013.net (ornadv) Date: Tue, 10 Jan 2006 20:34:45 -0000 Subject: Horcruxes - perhaps one less to hunt Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146203 >Goddlefrood >Bertha was of no signifance to LV >Also there would be a possibility that Wormtail >would have found out what was going on and IMHO LV does not trust >Wormtail. >Upon killing Frank Bryce, and assuming that LV did create a Horcurx >with his killing as Dumbledore suggests, Tom would have severed all >links with the Muggle world of his youth and eliminated the last >potential witness to his murder of his grandparents and father. This >would be significant to LV as far as I am concerned. Orna: I'm not sure Voldemort knows Frank ? he is just a muggle for him. He doesn't say that Nagini tells him the muggle who lived nearby stands there, but just "an old muggle". And the Wormtail problem is the same with Frank. >Goddlefrood >The problem with the Horcruxes is that LV would not appear to be a >person who would stop at only six created Horcruxes. It would be >interesting to speculate, as I do, whether he actually made far >more. Orna: I think that Voldemort would stop at six, since he believes 7 to be the most powerful magical number. He wouldn't risk loosing the magical power, just to make more and more horcruxes. There might even be something in the process of creating the horcrux, which weakens or hurts the wizard in a way ? Voldemort is clearly getting less human. Not that he cares about this, but there might be some other payoffs he would be more anxious to keep as low as possible. >Goddlefrood >On the matter of waiting to create a Horcrux from Harry's murder it >would be most unlikely because LV would want to be fully protected >before facing a person whom he believes (based on the portion of the >prophecy known to LV) to have the power to defeat him. Orna: I too would think the way you do ? but Voldemort doesn't think like that, according to DD. If he had thought this way, he wouldn't go to Godric's Hollow on the first place unprotected. According to DD, he planned to make with Harry's murder his last horcrux. So he preferred to have this horcrux designated for his meaningful murder, rather than coming fully protected ? even though there were Harry's parents he had to overcome then. That means IMO that with Voldemort ritualism and magic thinking gets the upper hand on strategic logical planning. He might rethink this, after Harry defeated him. But he might stick to his basic plan ? since he survived, his protection seems good enough, so why change the plan? In GoF he doesn't treat Harry respectfully as a dangerous opponent ? he plans mainly how to get to Harry, but one-to-one with him ? he doesn't look very cautious. Even in OotP he tries to AKe him casually ? so to speak. So I'm not sure he would change his basic strategy of making those 7 horcruxes because of fearing the potter-Boy. The existing horcruxes protect him from death, and the final horcrux wouldn't add anything to his duel with Harry. Personally, I would take your advice ? finish the protection ASAP before facing the boy with the prophecy. But I doubt if Voldemort would. Still you may be right - because there is Nagini's compliance to Voldemort to explain - so perhaps he did it , after all the way you said, in Parselmouth...while Wormtail was taking a shower. Orna, trying unsuccessfully to cut down the horcrux hunt From GAP5685 at AOL.com Tue Jan 10 20:34:27 2006 From: GAP5685 at AOL.com (gwen_of_the_oaks) Date: Tue, 10 Jan 2006 20:34:27 -0000 Subject: Phineas Nigellus: Witness for Snape? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146204 > Finwitch: > > There's also the fact that where none would of told Phineas how the > 'last of the Blacks', his own great-grandson - died - Harry did. Just because Harry figured it was *right*. (in the end of OOP) > > Hermione's comment "maybe there was a reason they didn't" made Harry > regret it a bit, but what if Dumbledore's reason for not telling > Phineas was so that *Harry* would tell Phineas and thus have Phineas > owe him a favour? > > Gwen: I'm sorry, but can you cite the page containing the conversation you are referring to? Unless I'm misunderstanding (which is completely likey) - Harry *did not* tell Phineas anything about Sirius. In fact, (OOTP US Hardcover pg 821): quote " He [Phineas] gave another shuddering yawn. "Another message for my worthless great-great-grandson?" Harry could not speak. Phineas Nigellus did not know that Sirius was dead, but Harry could not tell him. To say it aloud would be to make it final, absolute irretrievable " And then a few pages later, after AD has said "it is my fault Sirius died" and has calmed Harry down a bit.... quote "Am I to understand," said Phineas Nugellus slowly from Harry's left, "that my great-great-grandson - the last of the Blacks - is dead?" "Yes, Phineas," said Dumbledore. "I don't believe it," said Phineas brusquely. endquote So, Harry didnt tell Phineas anything about Sirius, and there wasn't any converstion with him at the end of OOTP, but perhaps what you are citing comes from the begining of HBP? I just cant remember him talking to Phineas or the comment of Hermione's you mention.(My HPB copy is still on loan - so I can't check). I agree that Phineas seems to be more involved in general than the other portraits with what goes on in the Headmasters office, and is probably privy to quite a bit of *inside* information - some of which has to pertain to Regulus and the locket. I also think he is more kindly disposed towards Harry than he lets on. Although, I think if he divulges anything to Harry it will be from his portrait at Grimmauld Place, since it doesn't look like Harry will be spending much time at Hogwarts in book 7. Gwen From maria8162001 at yahoo.com Tue Jan 10 18:59:37 2006 From: maria8162001 at yahoo.com (Maria Vaerewyck) Date: Tue, 10 Jan 2006 18:59:37 -0000 Subject: Is Dumbledore dead? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146205 "staceyv2220" wrote: > I seem to recall something about Merlin dying and rising again > from a lake of fire. Does anyone know anything about this? It > would bring more understanding to the Dumbledore discussion. I > have to question his death because J.K.R. repeats so many times > that he will only be gone when no one is left who is loyal to > him and Harry is "Dumbledore's man." maria8162001: I don't know about the rest but for me Dumbledore is not really dead. After reading the HBP, I cannot really believe that he is dead. I guess it has somthing to do with the secret plan that he has with Snape. Remember when Hagrid overheard them arguing in the forest? And then when Snape said the Avada Kedavra spell the effect was different from those who died from the Avada Kedavra before (other HP books). Then when he fell over the battlements, nobody really went directly to look at his body. It took a lot of time for Harry to finally reach the place where the body of Dumbledore is. There was plenty of time for Dumbledore to do anything with regard to his body to make it look like he's really dead. Because it was certainly not a very powerful Avada Kedavra Snape cast on him. And according to Snape's expression he certainly hated the thing that he was about to do on Dumbledore. "Snape gazed for a moment at Dumbledore, and there was revulsion and hatred etched in the harsh lines of his face." I guess that's what's they were arguing in the forest. Dumbledore wanted him to kill him if Draco would be convinced easily to change sides to protect him and his mother and the Unbreakable Vow Snape have with Draco. Dumbledore knew from the beginning that Draco is not a killer and would not be able to kill him. Besides there are a lot of clues that his death was all planned. And then there's this fire and smoke in his funeral. First, nobody really saw the body of Dumbledore during the funeral, it was covered well when Hagrid brought it to the table. Then nobody lit a fire but his body burst into flames/fire and the smoke that came out of it, "Bright, white flames had erupted around Dumbledore's body and the table upon which it lay: higher and higher they rose, obscuring the body. White smoke spiralled into the air and made strange shapes: Harry thought, for one stopping moment, that he saw a phoenix fly joyfully into the blue, but next second the fire had vanished." I am not certain if DD is an animagus but if he is we can already assume that it would be a phoenix, either way if he wasn't an animagus who did that phoenix smoke represents? There's only one we know, Fawkes, but he's alive, unless he was wrapped as well in that bundle Hagrid put on the table. Then there's DD wand. What happened to it? After he was disarmed by Draco it was never mentioned anymore, did anybody get it and hide it? We know very well that a wizard's wand is very important to them, as it was mentioned on the song of Hagrid and Slughorn when they were drunk and was singing about "Odo, the wizard, a hero," he had his wand with him in his funeral according to the song even when it was broken into two. Then there's this, another expression of Snape when Harry called him coward the second time for killing DD. Harry said to Snape "Kill me like you killed him, you coward-' 'DON'T-' screamed Snape, and his face was suddenly demented, inhuman, as though he was in as much pain as the yelping, howling dog stuck in the burning house behind them,'-CALL ME COWARD!' Why would Snape's expression be like that if he really killed DD in cold blood? It's an expression that suggests that he hated that thing he had to do even under DD's order and it pained him so much that his pain even make him looked inhuman. Harry called him coward before that when Harry told him to fight him back as he was just deflecting Harry's curses and he just shouted to Harry like this "Coward, did you call me Potter?' shouted Snape. 'Your father would never attack me unless it was four to one, what would you call him, I wonder?' Why in that instant Snape didn't react like demented and with pain? Well, I guess you can figure it out now. Also we have to go back to the time when the group where in the hospital wing of Hogwarts and they heard the Phoenix song/lament. Are we certain that the phoenix was really lamenting about the death of DD? Maybe he needed to do that to ease the pain of everybody that reckoned DD is dead, or maybe the phoenix was lamenting to heal DD, as we all know a phoenix tear has powerful healing. Harry knew the feeling as he had felt the healing power of the Fawkes' tears in the SS/PS. That's why I expect DD on almost the end of the 7th book. And we'll know what really happened. But either he's dead or not, it was all his plan and Snape was his best shot for his plan. From ornawn at 013.net Tue Jan 10 21:03:18 2006 From: ornawn at 013.net (ornadv) Date: Tue, 10 Jan 2006 21:03:18 -0000 Subject: Special treatment - yes or no/Rules Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146206 >Montavilla47: >There's a big, big difference in giving up the cup because you >feel it's unfair, or somehow more "right" for the cup to go to >the other person and having it snatched away from you. >Perhaps, given the chance, the Slytherins would have made the >gesture of giving up the cup to Gryffindor for the Trio's >actions. They weren't given that chance.. Orna: They had a good chance ? they sat there with their colors spread out ? doing nothing. They knew for some days how the points stood ? didn't have any meetings about this. Nobody said anything like the Gryffindors deserved it. >Montavilla47: >A more apt analogy would be if Harry and Cedric were running >after the Tri-Wizard cup at full tilt and Croody showed up, >stunned Cedric, and handed the prize to Harry Orna: I agree that some Slytherins might feel the way you describe it. But - that's the whole point ? Cedric refused to run to the trophy, although he could- Harry's leg was hurt. But he felt it unfair after Harry rescued him. And when in PoA he won the Snitch while Harry fell off his broom because of the dementors ? he tried to cancel his win, IIRC. Draco and friends, OTOH, just thought they could use Harry's weakness to sabotage him, and make his team loose. In PS the Slytherins just sit there waiting to enjoy the celebration, never understanding that there are more important things than winning. I agree that there is some comeuppance feeling in snatching the win at the last minute. (Like in soccer ? the taste of last minute goals). But since the game is going on until declared finished, and it has direct relevance to their priorities, I feel it is no more than a decent person would be expected to accept understandingly. But we might differ on this. Orna From horridporrid03 at yahoo.com Tue Jan 10 22:54:48 2006 From: horridporrid03 at yahoo.com (horridporrid03) Date: Tue, 10 Jan 2006 22:54:48 -0000 Subject: Horcrux and Lily Stepping Aside (was:Re: Nagini etymology + snakes' lifespan?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146207 > >>Carol: > If being a Horcrux does grant her something like the immortality of > Tolkien's Elves (subject to death in battle but not to old age or > disease), that might explain how Voldemort can possess her without > destroying her life force (as he did Quirrell's and those of the > small creatures he possessed at other times). It would also be an > argument against deliberately creating a human Horcrux, especially > Harry. Why would he want to make his archnemesis or a potential > rival immortal? (I don't think a Horcrux can be created > accidentally, as it requires a spell.) > Betsy Hp: I don't usually get involved in this sort of discussion, but I just had a brain wave caused by the above comment of Carol's. (Yup, this is *her* fault .) What if Voldemort did the Horcrux creating spell just before he burst in on Lily and Harry? IIRC, Dumbledore suspected that Voldemort wanted to create a Horcrux with Harry's death. So Voldemort would have waited to cast the spell until after he'd killed James, but he'd have cast the spell just before he entered the room Harry and Lily were in because he wants the spell to remain a secret. Wouldn't want the other Death Eaters to go all immortal on him. (It's generally believed that someone else was there, right?) That would explain why he wanted Lily to step aside (she wasn't a Horcrux worthy kill), and it would explain why a Horcrux was created with her death. (One was created at that point, yes? I mean, there's just a question of whether the spell went into Nagini or Harry, right?) It wouldn't be as bangy as some of the other theories I've seen, and I may be overlooking some major issue -- but I just thought I'd share. Betsy Hp (hoping she's not repeating a million other people ) From miles at martinbraeutigam.de Tue Jan 10 23:09:28 2006 From: miles at martinbraeutigam.de (Miles) Date: Wed, 11 Jan 2006 00:09:28 +0100 Subject: Horcrux and Lily Stepping Aside References: Message-ID: <00ab01c6163a$e93cd4b0$14b2a8c0@rechnerchen> No: HPFGUIDX 146208 > Betsy Hp: > What if Voldemort did the Horcrux creating > spell just before he burst in on Lily and Harry? Miles: As far as we know, the requirement for making a horcrux is a split soul, and we know that a split soul doesn't heal. So there was no reason for Voldemort to create the Hx at Godric's Hollow, his soul would be split afterwards as well. Betsy Hp: > That would explain why he wanted Lily to step aside (she wasn't a > Horcrux worthy kill), and it would explain why a Horcrux was created > with her death. (One was created at that point, yes? I mean, > there's just a question of whether the spell went into Nagini or > Harry, right?) Miles: Erm, no and no. 1) Voldemort killed James just before, why should he spare Lily just because she is no worthy kill - James wasn't as well. 2) No, DD does not think that Nagini was made a horcrux in Godric's Hollow. We do not even know that she was Voldemort's "pet" then. Miles From zgirnius at yahoo.com Tue Jan 10 23:23:56 2006 From: zgirnius at yahoo.com (zgirnius) Date: Tue, 10 Jan 2006 23:23:56 -0000 Subject: Horcrux and Lily Stepping Aside In-Reply-To: <00ab01c6163a$e93cd4b0$14b2a8c0@rechnerchen> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146209 > Miles: > As far as we know, the requirement for making a horcrux is a split soul, and > we know that a split soul doesn't heal. So there was no reason for Voldemort > to create the Hx at Godric's Hollow, his soul would be split afterwards as zgirnius: Yes, but there is a complicating issue here. Voldemort is a mass- murderer. We are talking tens, possibly hundreds of soul pieces. Yet Voldemort is not happy with using just any one of these bits to make a Horcrux, oh no. It must the the particular soul bit created by a 'special' murder. But with all of those bits wandering about, how is he to make sure he uses the right one? Perhaps (as you speculate) he can somehow sense them and tell them all apart. But perhaps he cannot. The spell Betsy suggests Voldemort cast in preparation might have been to ensure that the NEXT soul bit created gets used in the Horcrux-making. From miles at martinbraeutigam.de Tue Jan 10 23:27:25 2006 From: miles at martinbraeutigam.de (Miles) Date: Wed, 11 Jan 2006 00:27:25 +0100 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Horcrux and Lily Stepping Aside References: Message-ID: <00b301c6163d$6aed98d0$14b2a8c0@rechnerchen> No: HPFGUIDX 146210 zgirnius wrote: > The spell Betsy suggests Voldemort cast in preparation might > have been to ensure that the NEXT soul bit created gets used in the > Horcrux-making. Miles: But this "next" murder was James. I don't think this speculation works. From horridporrid03 at yahoo.com Tue Jan 10 23:54:29 2006 From: horridporrid03 at yahoo.com (horridporrid03) Date: Tue, 10 Jan 2006 23:54:29 -0000 Subject: Humanity, Kant, Caricatures, and Draco (was Re: Real child abuse) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146212 > >>Betsy Hp: > > > > In order to make that argument with any sort of sincerity you'd > > have to show that the bounced child either doesn't feel pain, or > > is somehow so wrong in essentials they actually deserve to be > > treated so brutally. > > > >>Nora: > Interpersonal comparison of emotion and utility is a no-no, or so > I always get told by my social science type friends. But again, > I think the specifics around each situation make the world of > difference. Betsy Hp: I'm not actually sure what your first sentence above means, Nora. Within the real world I'm fairly confident that bouncing a child on a stone floor is considered a bad thing, so I'm a bit befuddled on where Social Sciences enter into it and how it affects my original statement. But in the world of fiction there are times where a bouncing child *is* hilarious. Bugs Bunny cartoons, for example, use this sort of physical comedy as their bread and butter. But part of the humor is based on the fact that Daffy Duck or Elmer Fudd aren't really hurt. Daffy's bill may be blown backwords, but he's not really suffering. In Draco's case JKR tells us straight out that he is in pain. And not an exaggerated form either. Draco is hurt and he's trying to hide it. There's not a lot of cartoon humor in that. So we move on to the next criteria: Draco is so inhuman he deserves to be brutalized. IOW, the situation calls for it. JKR *does* set us up to think this way initially. Especially with Fake!Moody doing his hew and cry about only cowards attacking from behind. But by the end of the book (and I think it's all laid out within GoF) we learn that a. Fake!Moody's argument was as fake as the rest of him, and b. even the good guys will attack from behind with the right provocation. > >>Nora: > > It's Barty on a nasty personal vendetta, we get from the re- > read--but it's still Draco instigating and attacking from behind. > That means (for me at least) there is this undercurrent to the > scene the second read-through, but the urge to indulge in > Schadenfreude isn't eliminated because the instigation remains and > is not mitigated in any way. > > I think that degree of instigation *does* matter, even through JKR > does also paint the violent response as not intelligent, in many > cases. Why does instigation matter so much? It seems to have to > do with the skepticism towards institutions and the glorification > of the individual. Betsy Hp: And yet, Draco doesn't attack in a vacuum. He *doesn't* instigate. Harry has just insulted his mother. So Draco does have motivation, and rather noble motivation as well (as any schoolboy can tell you). Not that Draco is pure as the driven snow. He did insult Molly. But this isn't a case of Draco launching an attack out of nowhere. Interestingly enough, the twins have less of an excuse for their attack from behind. It's not like Cedric was their friend, and it's not like Draco was interacting with them. So again, it comes down to the argument that Draco is somehow less human than our heroes. He's not allowed to love his mother as much as they love theirs; he's not supposed to feel pain like they feel pain. And this just doesn't seem to be the direction JKR is going. Especially since a Death Eater was the dispenser of "justice" in this particular situation. Betsy Hp, who hit enter a tad too early, so please, please ignore the mess that came before this post From horridporrid03 at yahoo.com Wed Jan 11 00:04:03 2006 From: horridporrid03 at yahoo.com (horridporrid03) Date: Wed, 11 Jan 2006 00:04:03 -0000 Subject: Horcrux and Lily Stepping Aside In-Reply-To: <00b301c6163d$6aed98d0$14b2a8c0@rechnerchen> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146213 > >>zgirnius wrote: > > > > The spell Betsy suggests Voldemort cast in preparation might > > have been to ensure that the NEXT soul bit created gets used in the > > Horcrux-making. > >>Miles: > But this "next" murder was James. I don't think this speculation > works. Betsy Hp: No, no, it goes like this. Voldemort decends on the Potters. He expects to clash with James. So he doesn't start the spell yet. But *once James is out of the way* Voldemort figures the next kill will be Harry, a Horcrux worthy death. (Zgirnius is right.) So he sends his goons on ahead, chants his "super secret soul sealing spell" (tm), and then heads in himself, all charged up to kill Harry and create his final(?) Horcrux. But then Lily, that silly girl, gets in the way and the rest is Potterverse history. Betsy Hp From willsonkmom at msn.com Wed Jan 11 00:18:32 2006 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Wed, 11 Jan 2006 00:18:32 -0000 Subject: Mrs. Figg (Was: Dursleys) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146214 Carol wrote: > > At any rate, I like Mrs. Figg's spunk and she's in the books (and the > Order) for a reason. I think we'll find out what it is quite early in > Book 7 in the Battle of Privet Drive. > > Does anyone agree? If not, what do you think her role in Book 7 will > be? Could it have something to do with Mundungus Fletcher? Potioncat: I vote for Figgy. Wouldn't be surprised if she isn't someone's sister...heck it would be funny if she was Eileen Prince's sister...OK..erm... I'd like to see her transfigure a teabag into a mouse for the kitties to chase around. But certainly, it would be much, much more fun for her to be a witch than for Filch to be a wizard. Besides, she deserves it. From katmac at katmac.cncdsl.com Wed Jan 11 00:24:04 2006 From: katmac at katmac.cncdsl.com (lagattalucianese) Date: Wed, 11 Jan 2006 00:24:04 -0000 Subject: Horcrux and Lily Stepping Aside In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146215 > ...> > zgirnius: > Yes, but there is a complicating issue here. Voldemort is a mass- > murderer. We are talking tens, possibly hundreds of soul pieces. Yet > Voldemort is not happy with using just any one of these bits to make > a Horcrux, oh no. It must the the particular soul bit created by > a 'special' murder. But with all of those bits wandering about, how > is he to make sure he uses the right one? Perhaps (as you speculate) > he can somehow sense them and tell them all apart. But perhaps he > cannot. The spell Betsy suggests Voldemort cast in preparation might > have been to ensure that the NEXT soul bit created gets used in the > Horcrux-making. > La Gatta Lucianese: Voldemort is a mass murderer indirectly; isn't the actual killing done by his Death Eaters et al.? He can afford to be selective about the murders he commits personally, so maybe his soul isn't as fragmented as all that. A couple of questions: 1. Does a multiple murder committed at one time split the soul only once? That would account for one soul-splitting, and therefore only one horcrux (the diary?, resulting from the death of his father and grandparents. Likewise, perhaps, one soul-splitting resulting from the deaths of James and Lily, whether or not he used that particular split to make a horcrux. 2. How long after a particular murder can a wizard wait to plant the soul fragment in a horcrux? Does it have to be done immediately, or can he wait until conditions are a little less fraught? I.e., could he have used the deaths of James and Lily to create a horcruz at some future time when he was well away from Godrick's Hollow and away from the eyes of whichever Death Eater (Peter?) was with him? From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Wed Jan 11 00:47:22 2006 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Wed, 11 Jan 2006 00:47:22 -0000 Subject: Horcrux and Lily Stepping Aside (was:Re: Nagini etymology + snakes' lifespan?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146216 Carol earlier: > > If being a Horcrux does grant her [Nagini] something like the immortality of Tolkien's Elves (subject to death in battle but not to old age or disease), that might explain how Voldemort can possess her without destroying her life force (as he did Quirrell's and those of the small creatures he possessed at other times). It would also be an argument against deliberately creating a human Horcrux, especially Harry. Why would he want to make his archnemesis or a potential rival immortal? (I don't think a Horcrux can be created accidentally, as it requires a spell.) > > > > Betsy Hp: > I don't usually get involved in this sort of discussion, but I just > had a brain wave caused by the above comment of Carol's. (Yup, this > is *her* fault .) What if Voldemort did the Horcrux creating > spell just before he burst in on Lily and Harry? IIRC, Dumbledore > suspected that Voldemort wanted to create a Horcrux with Harry's > death. So Voldemort would have waited to cast the spell until after > he'd killed James, but he'd have cast the spell just before he > entered the room Harry and Lily were in because he wants the spell > to remain a secret. Wouldn't want the other Death Eaters to go all > immortal on him. (It's generally believed that someone else was > there, right?) > > That would explain why he wanted Lily to step aside (she wasn't a > Horcrux worthy kill), and it would explain why a Horcrux was created > with her death. (One was created at that point, yes? I mean, > there's just a question of whether the spell went into Nagini or > Harry, right?) Carol responds: Well, no, not necessarily. I think he either had all his Horcruxes before he went to Godruc's Hollow or he created the Nagini Horcrux quite deliberately after his body was restored (although that does make his affinity with Nagini problematic. What else might have brought it about if it exists before she becomes a Horcrux)? I don't believe in accidental Horcruxes (they require a spell, or more likely a complex incantation), nor in Harry as Horcrux (I think he acquired some of Voldie's powers, including Parseltongue, but not a soul bit). I also don't think that a Horcrux needs to be made on the spot immediately after a murder. For example, if he used Myrtle's murder, important because it was his first, to make the diary Horcrux, he would have had to wait quite a while to do it. He had already murdered his own father and grandparents and returned to school before he asked Slughorn about Horcruxes. And I doubt that he could have learned more about them at Hogwarts; he'd have had to do it on his summer holiday before his seventh year. So even if he used his father's murder rather than Myrtle's to turn the diary into a Horcrux (which doesn't make sense to me because there's no connection between the two), there would still be a time lag because he didn't know how to make a Horcrux yet.) I also don't think he needs to have the object that will be turned into a Horcrux with him when he commits the murder. He wrote the diary after Myrtle's death (and put the memory of seeing her body in it), so he wouldn't have had it with him. It didn't have any significance yet and he didn't know how to make a Horcrux yet. He may not even have known of their existence at that point, since the diary originally had a very different purpose. Also, IIRC, he took the ring from Morfin after he'd killed the Riddles at the same time he planted the false memory in Morfin's mind. He didn't have it with him, and may not even have known of its existence, when he killed his father. The only reason he had the locket and cup future Horcruxes with him when he killed Hepzibah Smith is that he had to kill her to get them. And he could have used her murder to transform only one of them into a Horcrux (probably the cup because it was associated with Hufflepuff and so was she. The locket was associated with his own Slytherin heritage). But my point is that he doesn't need to have an object with him when he commits a murder to turn it into a Horcrux later. All that's required is an unused soul bit from a previous murder, a suitable object, and the incantation, whatever it may be. (It may require a ritual as well; I imagine it's a complex bit of magic. I can't see him lifting a soul bit out of his head as easily as Snape removes a thought to put it in a Pensieve.) As I see it, as long as his soul is already split by a murder, he can use the soul bit from that murder to make a Horcrux at any time. If there's a connection between the murder and the object, so much the better, but it's not absolutely necessary. So he would not have needed to take an object with him to Godric's Hollow, or to bring Nagini with him if he intended to use her. (There's certainly no hint of her presence at GH in canon.) But he could have used Harry's murder to make a Horcrux as soon as he was able to hold a wand (and Peter was conveniently out on an errand). The problem there, as I said, is how he could have developed such an affinity with Nagini that he could use her venom to sustain him if she wasn't already a Horcrux. (Ideas, anybody?) To me it seems more likely that he made the Horcruxes, including Nagini, before he even knew about the Prophecy, or at least before he went to Godric's Hollow to kill Harry. (Murdering the One who could defeat him would have been a much greater priority than creating a sixth Horcrux, even if he intended to use Harry's death to create one later.) We've all wondered why there was a fifteen-month delay between Harry's birth and his parents' death. It certainly wouldn't have taken Voldie that long to find out which baby boys had been born at the end of July; all he would need to do is read the birth announcements in the Daily Prophet. So maybe he was trying to find a suitable object (valuable, powerfully magical, having some personal significance, not subject to decay or corruption) and, failing to find one that met these criteria, settled on his dear familiar, Nagini. Granted, we don't know when he acquired her, but her already being a Horcrux before Godric's Hollow would explain how he (or rather Wormtail) could use her venom to create that rudimentary body and to nourish him in fetal form while he was waiting for Harry's blood to restore his former body. Wow. I didn't mean to create a book from this, but my post seems to have stimulated a brain wave from Betsy that was very far from my own view of the subject. So, no. We're not limited to Harry and Nagini as candidates for the sixth Horcrux (though I do think it's Nagini). The Horcrux doesn't have to be present at the scene of the murder and it doesn't have to be created immediately. We don't even know whether it was created before or after Godric's Hollow. All I was discussing in the previous post is Nagini's magical qualities and the effect being a Horcrux might have on Nagini if she were one. I certainly didn't mean to imply that she was with Voldemort at Godric's Hollow. And again, I don't believe in accidental Horcruxes, Harry or anything else. IMO, intention and time and concentration are required to create a Horcrux. You don't just zap an object with a one- or two- word spell and go back to the business of murdering the One you fear will defeat you. Carol, who *does* believe in accidental brainwaves inspired by posts that really meant something altogether different From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Wed Jan 11 00:54:40 2006 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Wed, 11 Jan 2006 00:54:40 -0000 Subject: Horcrux and Lily Stepping Aside (was:Re: Nagini etymology + snakes' lifespan?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146217 Carol brilliantly wrote: > So he would not have needed to take an object with him to Godric's > Hollow, or to bring Nagini with him if he intended to use her. > (There's certainly no hint of her presence at GH in canon.) But he > could have used Harry's murder to make a Horcrux as soon as he was > able to hold a wand (and Peter was conveniently out on an errand). > later.) Sorry, List Elves. I know this is my fourth post, but I couldn't let this go. I don't mean *Harry's* murder. (Duh!) I meant Lily's murder. Harry obviously wasn't dead. Carol, hoping she won't have to iron her hands or take a detention with Umbridge From nrenka at yahoo.com Wed Jan 11 01:02:36 2006 From: nrenka at yahoo.com (nrenka) Date: Wed, 11 Jan 2006 01:02:36 -0000 Subject: Humanity, Kant, Caricatures, and Draco (was Re: Real child abuse) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146218 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "horridporrid03" wrote: > > >>Nora: > > Interpersonal comparison of emotion and utility is a no-no, or so > > I always get told by my social science type friends. But again, > > I think the specifics around each situation make the world of > > difference. > > Betsy Hp: > I'm not actually sure what your first sentence above means, Nora. Umm, sorry. The classic problem of Utilitarianism (and the social sciences in general). In short and reduction, it's really hard to say "Person X is more sad about events than Person Y," because those are things that resist quantification. It's hard to compare some ideas of things like benefit, harm, and utility because of how personal they are. Happiness and sadness are incommensurable things (in one major objection). So there are problems inherent in saying "This student was totally more hurt by this than another student". Not saying that it's *impossible* or there aren't factors that we can give more importance to, but saying that it can be deeply problematic. > So we move on to the next criteria: Draco is so inhuman he deserves > to be brutalized. I don't think that's the conclusion, but neither do I think it's gone as far back the other way as you want it to. Draco instigates with malice, and while he does not deserve to have a teacher abuse authority upon him, neither does he inspire as much pity as an innocent victim would. > Betsy Hp: > And yet, Draco doesn't attack in a vacuum. He *doesn't* > instigate. He does escalate, and I suspect that it's deliberately made not quite commensurate with situations such as the train at the end of book. I think Rowling writes it in ways that she wants us to see how it is alike, but she's emphasizing the differences just as much. What are the differences? Well, there's context--insulting someone's mother versus threats after the death of a student, which means I don't quite understand: > Interestingly enough, the twins have less of an excuse for their > attack from behind. It's not like Cedric was their friend, and > it's not like Draco was interacting with them. Of course, Draco does indicate that Ron and Hermione are next, which I do suspect the Twins might have some interest in. I guess I just don't see the grand equivalency argument being made here, because the actions are motivated differently and come from people in very different ethical positions. In a fictional universe where an author can control events, that makes for different results. It's so nice when you can make things follow a system. > So again, it comes down to the argument that Draco is somehow less > human than our heroes. He's not allowed to love his mother as much > as they love theirs; he's not supposed to feel pain like they feel > pain. Not that he's somehow less human, but he *is* consistently the wrongly motivated and openly malicious party. Does that mean JKR gives him more lumps and lets him get away with less, and she slants his actions differently, that something may be okay when someone else does it but not when he does 'the same thing'? Yes. That's one of the functions of considering aspects of character and context overruling the Kantian position. You disawoved the hard position, but your arguments keep wanting to lean in that direction for its universality. :) -Nora says: the only perfectly good thing is the perfectly good will, if we go down that route From kelleyaynn at yahoo.com Wed Jan 11 01:06:24 2006 From: kelleyaynn at yahoo.com (kelleyaynn) Date: Wed, 11 Jan 2006 01:06:24 -0000 Subject: Nagini? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146219 > Pippin: > I can't find the reference, but years ago I read an interview with JKR > in which she said the one thing she would change if she could is that > she didn't know when she wrote PS/SS that Boa Constrictors weren't > poisonous. So maybe the boa from PS/SS was originally intended to > be Voldemort's familiar in later books, and JKR had to change it. Kelleyaynn: I hope she did have to change it, even if it would have been an interesting twist. Can you imagine the guilt Harry would feel if the snake he accidentally let loose turned into Nagini? The poor kid already believes nearly everything is his fault. That would surely have driven him 'round the bend. Kelleyaynn From ceridwennight at hotmail.com Wed Jan 11 01:14:04 2006 From: ceridwennight at hotmail.com (Ceridwen) Date: Wed, 11 Jan 2006 01:14:04 -0000 Subject: Horcrux and Lily Stepping Aside (was:Re: Nagini etymology + snakes' lifespan?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146220 Carol: > I also don't think that a Horcrux needs to be made on the spot > immediately after a murder. For example, if he used Myrtle's murder, > important because it was his first, to make the diary Horcrux, he > would have had to wait quite a while to do it. He had already murdered > his own father and grandparents and returned to school before he asked > Slughorn about Horcruxes. And I doubt that he could have learned more > about them at Hogwarts; he'd have had to do it on his summer holiday > before his seventh year. So even if he used his father's murder rather > than Myrtle's to turn the diary into a Horcrux (which doesn't make > sense to me because there's no connection between the two), there > would still be a time lag because he didn't know how to make a Horcrux > yet.) *(snip)* Ceridwen: I'm not sure that TR didn't know the basics about horcruxes before he talked to Slughorn. I've just read it over again (pgs. 496-498 HBP Scholastic) and I still think it's possible that the entire wrangle was a ploy to get to the question of how many horcruxes a wizard could make. He was very careful of his wording until he got to that part. Then he used some unwise phrasing, IMO: (pg 498) "...I mean, would one Horcrux be much use? *Can* you only split your soul once? Wouldn't it be *better*, make you *stronger*, to have your soul in more pieces, I mean, for instance, isn't seven the most powerfully magic number, wouldn't seven --?" --(*Emphasis* mine) Until this point, he's polite and restrained, even though Harry sees a gleeful or hungry look on his face. IMO, this is the material he's really interested in learning. But he doesn't want to let on that he knows anything more about Horcruxes than the name. He leads Slughorn down the path of the discussion, listening eagerly (he already knows this stuff) until he gets to the thing he wants to know, then he gets anxious and makes the faux pas *emphasized* above. That's when Slughorn looks at him as if he'd 'never seen him plainly before'. It could be read any other way, of course, but this is how I read it. Ceridwen. From belviso at attglobal.net Wed Jan 11 02:37:11 2006 From: belviso at attglobal.net (sistermagpie) Date: Wed, 11 Jan 2006 02:37:11 -0000 Subject: Special treatment - yes or no/Rules In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146221 > Orna: > They had a good chance ? they sat there with their colors spread > out ? doing nothing. They knew for some days how the points stood ? > didn't have any meetings about this. Nobody said anything like > the Gryffindors deserved it. Magpie: So since the Slytherins can't be faulted for their response to Dumbledore's change of decorations, since none of them object (Malfoy just looks stunned and horrified and Snape forces a smile and shakes Minerva's hand) we'll resort to condemning them for not going to Dumbledore at the first hint of rumor that Harry and his friends had done something exceptional somewhere and taking themselves out of the contest? Or thinking it was up to them to make sure Dumbledore awarded Gryffindor enough points to win? Or perhaps Marcus Flint should have hopped up the moment Slytherin's points were announced, marched over to Cormac McClaggan (or any random Gryffindor) and pulled a Tony Manero, telling him Slytherin was giving them the house cup because, "we think youse deserve it." The Slytherins are sounding better to me all the time. -m From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Wed Jan 11 02:46:52 2006 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Wed, 11 Jan 2006 02:46:52 -0000 Subject: Humanity, Kant, Caricatures, and Draco /Train scene again/Slytherins and Quiddit In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146222 Betsy: > > Interestingly enough, the twins have less of an excuse for their > > attack from behind. It's not like Cedric was their friend, and > > it's not like Draco was interacting with them. Nora: > Of course, Draco does indicate that Ron and Hermione are next, which > I do suspect the Twins might have some interest in. Alla: Not only that Nora, but Harry is their friend, and Harry just had been through horrible ordeal and Draco shows up uninvited to their compartment and starts mocking Cedric's death and issuing death threats to Ron and Hermione. Pure provocation, IMO. "Too late now, Potter! They'll be the first to go, now the Dark Lord's back! Mudbloods and Muggle-lovers first! Well - second - Diggory was the f----" - GoF, paperback, p.720 Could have Gryffs responded less excessively? I guess, they could, but considering the gravity of what Harry just had been through and especially that Draco and his goons invite themselfs to Gryffs compartment, I absolutely do not blame them for the response. But I definitely understand that Twins were upset at death threat to their brother and Hermione ( whom I am guessing they figured out that Ron likes long time ago), IMO of course. I am trying to remember my first reaction to this scene. I don't think I laughed here at Draco's misfortune. But I sure did not feel much sympathy for him either. To me he was unquestionable provocateur. As I said before I would love if the response was absolutely proportionate ( before I have to explain my position many times :), BUT what Draco did makes people upset VERY much upset, IMO and when people are upset, they IMO may not calculate their response with absolute proportionality. Nora: > Not that he's somehow less human, but he *is* consistently the > wrongly motivated and openly malicious party. Does that mean JKR > gives him more lumps and lets him get away with less, and she slants > his actions differently, that something may be okay when someone else > does it but not when he does 'the same thing'? Alla: Agreed. It would be interesting if in book 7 Draco starts to experience true character change ( no I don't consider the inability to kill the Headmaster while facing him to be true character change, but I do think that it could be a first sign for such change), how would JKR evaluate his actions them. IMO of course. > Magpie: Or perhaps Marcus Flint > should have hopped up the moment Slytherin's points were announced, > marched over to Cormac McClaggan (or any random Gryffindor) and > pulled a Tony Manero, telling him Slytherin was giving them the house > cup because, "we think youse deserve it." > Alla: Oh, I don't expect anything THAT noble from Marcus, but offering the rematch after one of the matches where they behaved so disgustingly, IMO would have been nice. Cedric did that when Hufflepuff won 'fair and square", just because Harry suffered that unfortunate fall. IMO of course, Alla From maria8162001 at yahoo.com Tue Jan 10 19:15:46 2006 From: maria8162001 at yahoo.com (Maria Vaerewyck) Date: Tue, 10 Jan 2006 19:15:46 -0000 Subject: Did JKR crossed out "losing powers" ending?/ Stephen Fry int In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146223 Alla: > Do you guys think that this implies that the type > of ending where Harry loses his powers and leaving WW is > not going to happen? > > Although maybe it just implies that Harry losing > his powers and leaving WW won't happen - maybe he would > stay in WW ( THAT I am perfectly OK with :-)) I guess if there's somebody who's going to lose their power in the end, it would be Voldemort. Remember what Dumbledore told Voldemort when they were fighting at Ministry of Magic in the Order of the Phoenix book? When Voldemort said "You do not seek to kill me, Dumbledore?" called Voldemort, his scarlet eyes narrowed over the top of the shield. 'Above such brutality, are you?' We both know that there are ways of destroying a man, Tom,' Dumbledore said calmly. Then Voldemort answered like "There is nothing worst than death, Dumbledore!' "You are quite wrong," said Dumbledore. We all both know the Voldemort is afraid to die but what he didn't count on is if he would still be alive after this second war they are going to have in the WW and he would lose his power at the end. Wizards would not want to lose their power especially when they are used to it and more especially if they use it to make others fear them. Surviving without power is more worse than death, I guess. For Harry it would just be normal for him to be without power but for Voldemort it would be terrible. Besides everybody's betting that it would be Harry who's going to lose his power on the end but I would bet for Voldemort losing his power in the end. maria8162001 From kjones at telus.net Wed Jan 11 03:06:20 2006 From: kjones at telus.net (Kathryn Jones) Date: Tue, 10 Jan 2006 19:06:20 -0800 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Horcrux and Lily Stepping Aside In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <43C4762C.2000201@telus.net> No: HPFGUIDX 146224 lagattalucianese wrote: > > > ...> > > zgirnius: > > Yes, but there is a complicating issue here. Voldemort is a mass- > > murderer. We are talking tens, possibly hundreds of soul pieces. Yet > > Voldemort is not happy with using just any one of these bits to make > > a Horcrux, oh no. It must the the particular soul bit created by > > a 'special' murder. But with all of those bits wandering about, how > > is he to make sure he uses the right one? Perhaps (as you speculate) > > he can somehow sense them and tell them all apart. But perhaps he > > cannot. The spell Betsy suggests Voldemort cast in preparation might > > have been to ensure that the NEXT soul bit created gets used in the > > Horcrux-making. > > > La Gatta Lucianese: > > Voldemort is a mass murderer indirectly; isn't the actual killing done > by his Death Eaters et al.? He can afford to be selective about the > murders he commits personally, so maybe his soul isn't as fragmented > as all that. KJ writes: This brings up an interesting question. How many actual killings have we been told that Voldemort committed personally. This is what I can recall, are there any others? 1. His father 2. His grandfather 3. His grandmother 4. Hepzibah Smith 5. Dorcas Meadows 6. James Potter 7. Lily Potter 8. Frank Bryce 9. Bertha Jorkins Regulus Black was suggested but not proven. Amelia Bones was suggested by the damage done but not proven. She may have been hidden by Dumbledore. Emmeline Vance's death might have been faked as well to provide Snape with some appropriate background, or she may actually have been killed by DE's. It was not suggested that Karkaroff was killed by Voldemort personally. Myrtle was killed by the basilisk and I don't count her. She was in the wrong place at the wrong time. Cedric was actually killed by Wormtail KJ From foodiedb at optonline.net Wed Jan 11 03:01:58 2006 From: foodiedb at optonline.net (foodiedb) Date: Wed, 11 Jan 2006 03:01:58 -0000 Subject: Percy Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146225 Hi all, What does everyone think will go on with Percy in HP7? What will his role be, etc., etc.? Thanks, DB From zgirnius at yahoo.com Wed Jan 11 03:53:17 2006 From: zgirnius at yahoo.com (zgirnius) Date: Wed, 11 Jan 2006 03:53:17 -0000 Subject: Horcrux and Lily Stepping Aside In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146226 > La Gatta Lucianese: > > Voldemort is a mass murderer indirectly; isn't the actual killing done > by his Death Eaters et al.? He can afford to be selective about the > murders he commits personally, so maybe his soul isn't as fragmented > as all that. zgirnius: He has definitely killed more people than the number of Horcruxes he is believed to have. I don't believe he is selective with his killing in terms of trying to limit the number of fragments. The magic number 7, I think, is really the number of objects to which bits of his soul are bound. (6 Horcruxes, one Voldemort body. The Voldemort body just happens to have a soul which is torn into lots of pieces). I believe we are told he killed Bertha, for example-he could have had Pettigrew do it, but did not bother. It is also speculated that he killed Amelia Bones personally. , or wanted to. Sirius states his belief that Regulus was not important enough to have been killed by Voldemort personally-that this is specified suggests others may have been important enough. So I would guess that he personally has killed enough people to be well in the double digits. > La Gatta Lucianese: > 1. Does a multiple murder committed at one time split the soul only > once? That would account for one soul-splitting, and therefore only > one horcrux (the diary?, resulting from the death of his father and > grandparents. Likewise, perhaps, one soul-splitting resulting from the > deaths of James and Lily, whether or not he used that particular split > to make a horcrux. zgirnius: I do not believe this is the case. I think each murder 'counts'. Since each is the evil and unnatural elimination of a unique sentient being... This is of course only my opinion, Dumbledore and Slughorn do not go into this sort of detail in the canon we have. > La Gatta Lucianese: > 2. How long after a particular murder can a wizard wait to plant the > soul fragment in a horcrux? Does it have to be done immediately, or > can he wait until conditions are a little less fraught? I.e., could he > have used the deaths of James and Lily to create a horcruz at some > future time when he was well away from Godrick's Hollow and away from > the eyes of whichever Death Eater (Peter?) was with him? zgirnius: Another fact which is not known to us. Is the spell cast before or after? Both? Does the tear need to be very recent? We are not told any of this. I think that the door has definitely been left open for the idea that Harry's scar may be a Horcrux, and the presence of that piece of Voldemort's soul is the source of the mysterious connection Harry has with Voldemort. I can also definitely see ways in which Horcrux!Harry could be used to further develop the theme of sacrificial love. And I think Horcrux!Harry fits well with the words of the prophecy. *If* Harry is a Horcrux, then I would suspect that yes, the soul must be recently torn, and yes, if you care which bit makes the Horcrux you need to prepare in advance (because otherwise, as you say, Voldemort should have just waited...) If he is not, we may never learn the answers to these questions, or we may learn that the spell is definitely cast after ther murder, and possibly long after. From kchuplis at alltel.net Wed Jan 11 03:50:27 2006 From: kchuplis at alltel.net (Karen) Date: Tue, 10 Jan 2006 21:50:27 -0600 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Mrs. Figg (Was: Dursleys) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <67697464-8255-11DA-AC8C-000393B04DDE@alltel.net> No: HPFGUIDX 146227 On Tuesday, January 10, 2006, at 01:24 PM, justcarol67 wrote: > At any rate, I like Mrs. Figg's spunk and she's in the books (and the > Order) for a reason. I think we'll find out what it is quite early in > Book 7 in the Battle of Privet Drive. > I found it most interesting that at the end of GoF when Dumbledore is rallying the troups he includes Mrs. Figg: Page 713: "You are to alert Remus Lupin, Arabella Figg, Mundungus Fletcher - the old crowd." There she is, listed right in with the Order of the Phoenix gang "the old crowd". Also, I still get the impression people feel she was "a hired gun" at Harry's trial, but obviously, she saw something. There she was "don't put it away!" and raging on and on about the dementor's. I think she was just a bad witness but she DID see the dementors or she would never have shown up to help Harry. Remember, Harry is shocked when she knows about dementors? He didn't say anything. Mrs. Figg just seems the most logical candidate to me. kchuplis From h2so3f at yahoo.com Wed Jan 11 04:07:14 2006 From: h2so3f at yahoo.com (h2so3f) Date: Wed, 11 Jan 2006 04:07:14 -0000 Subject: Nagini etymology + snakes' lifespan? In-Reply-To: <20060110183334.77616.qmail@web33107.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146228 BD wrote: "Boa is a non-venomous constrictor while Nagini is a venomous cobra. Nagini is a name derived from Indian word Nag (meaning cobra) and the suffix -ini denoting the female of the species." CH3ed: I wonder if JKR is doing the same with Nagini what she did with other mythical creatures in her books, you know, kind of reinventing them so they aren't exactly like what you hear of them elsewhere. I'm a bit skeptical about Nagini being a cobra, since cobras are distinctly recognizable by the hooded shape of its head with the upside-down V marking on the back. No such characteristics have been noted about Nagini in the books. carol wrote: "I had thought that the mortality of both human beings and living creatures like Nagini would be a reason not to use one as a Horcrux (most of the others seem to be made of incorruptible gold) because the Horcrux would be destroyed when the creature or person died, but if you're right, I can understand Voldy wanting his dear Nagini, the only living being he cares about (rather like Filch and Mrs. Norris), sharing his immortality with him. But the argument against deliberately creating a *human* Horcrux still applies." CH3ed: I wonder if being made a horcrux would really make Nagini immortal, tho. It seems the horcrux soul pieces are not exactly immortal since they can be destroyed (tho their existence makes the home soul piece immortal... can't be destroyed in any way). I mean, the horcrux soul piece may live forever (until it is killed), but Nagini's soul could die, ay? How would this work? Would the LV soul piece take over Nagini's body when her soul dies? And along with the mortality of living things, DD is right in that putting a soul piece into something that has its own mind might not be such a good idea. I wonder how loyal Nagini is (I mean, snakes aren't often portrayed as epitome for that trait), considering that LV probably shortened her life needlessly by possessing her when he went to case out the DoM (and bit Arthur in the process) in OotP. I'm assuming that LV's speech in the GoF graveyard scene that possession shortens the snakes' life span applies. Couldn't LV have used L. Malfoy instead? After-all, Malfoy and the other DEs did get into the DoM Hall of Prophesy to wait for Harry and co to arrive. I wonder how the fact that Nagini has her own mind would contribute to the destruction of the horcrux soul piece in her. Carol wrote: " wondering how Voldemort expects to protect his still mortal body against aging since it's only his soul that's protected by the Horcruxes" CH3ed: Good catch! The same thing with Tolkien's elves, maybe? I've often wondered about there being young elves and old elves... They don't die naturally but they don't seem to physically stop aging at a certain point either. CH3ed :O) From nkafkafi at yahoo.com Wed Jan 11 04:13:10 2006 From: nkafkafi at yahoo.com (nkafkafi) Date: Wed, 11 Jan 2006 04:13:10 -0000 Subject: Horcrux and Lily Stepping Aside (was:Re: Nagini etymology + snakes' lifespan?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146229 > Carol: > > I don't believe in accidental Horcruxes (they require a spell, or more > likely a complex incantation), nor in Harry as Horcrux (I think he > acquired some of Voldie's powers, including Parseltongue, but not a > soul bit). Neri: There's at least one spell that, in very special circumstances, might happen accidentally without anybody casting it. I'm talking about Priori Incantatem, of course. And interestingly, those special circumstances happened between Harry and Voldy, in a yet another situation of the-unstoppable-force-meets-the-immovable-barrier. Don't blame JKR for inconsistency if she'll use a similar principle with the Hx spell at GH. Neri From kchuplis at alltel.net Wed Jan 11 04:16:33 2006 From: kchuplis at alltel.net (kchuplis) Date: Wed, 11 Jan 2006 04:16:33 -0000 Subject: Spies, Lies and Self fullfilling prophecies Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146230 I've tried searching but I just cannot find it. A while back, pippin was talking about ESE!Lupin and I got the impression that some people believe there was another spy besides Wormtail. What I've never been able to figure out from posts is where does that idea come from? I apologize if it has been discussed but I just couldn't find it. SFP (self fullfilling prophecies) The other night I was thinking and it occurred to me that this is really a recurring theme in the books. Of course, there is The Prophecy, which LV made self fulfilling. There is the Patronus by the lake. I consider this a kind of self fulfilled prophecy as Harry basically causes himself both to be there and to realize he'd already done the patronus so he knows he can. (Now, I'm really mad I didn't write this down the other night because I know I thought of a third one but my little brain can't remember it right now). What I was wondering is can you guys think of other SFP in the books. I really think there are more, but I'm really brain dead right now. I think this is an important running motif. It may give us clues for Book 7. kchuplis From bartl at sprynet.com Wed Jan 11 04:20:47 2006 From: bartl at sprynet.com (Bart Lidofsky) Date: Tue, 10 Jan 2006 23:20:47 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Mrs. Figg (Was: Dursleys) In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <43C4879F.3050103@sprynet.com> No: HPFGUIDX 146231 potioncat wrote: > Potioncat: > I vote for Figgy. Wouldn't be surprised if she isn't someone's > sister...heck it would be funny if she was Eileen Prince's > sister...OK..erm... Bart: Let's list all the non-magical people we have met: 1) Filch 2) Mrs. Figg 3) The Dursleys 4) Dr. & Mrs. Granger 5) Ummmm.... uh..... hmmmmm..... From iam.kemper at gmail.com Wed Jan 11 05:48:47 2006 From: iam.kemper at gmail.com (Kemper) Date: Tue, 10 Jan 2006 21:48:47 -0800 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Mrs. Figg (Was: Dursleys) In-Reply-To: <67697464-8255-11DA-AC8C-000393B04DDE@alltel.net> References: <67697464-8255-11DA-AC8C-000393B04DDE@alltel.net> Message-ID: <700201d40601102148i23644c3ew5b95a0894b61c994@mail.gmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 146232 On 1/10/06, Karen wrote: > > kchuplis: I found it most interesting that at the end of GoF when > Dumbledore is > rallying the troups he includes Mrs. Figg: Page 713: "You are to alert > Remus Lupin, Arabella Figg, Mundungus Fletcher - the old crowd." There > she is, listed right in with the Order of the Phoenix gang "the old > crowd". Also, I still get the impression people feel she was "a hired > gun" at Harry's trial, but obviously, she saw something. There she was > "don't put it away!" and raging on and on about the dementor's. I think > she was just a bad witness but she DID see the dementors or she would > never have shown up to help Harry. Remember, Harry is shocked when she > knows about dementors? He didn't say anything. Mrs. Figg just seems the > most logical candidate to me. . . Kemper now: I don't think Figgy saw the Dementors. I think she recognized a Dementor attack and recognized Harry's attempted and successful defense against it. Maybe she witnessed one or more in the past. I've asked in the past, what ever happened to Mr. Figg? Was he a Wizard, Squib or Muggle? Was he in the Order, too, or did Mrs. Figg join the Order after Mr. Figg went beyond the veil? And how did he go beyond the veil: was it nature or was he pushed? . What I don't like about Mrs. Figg being the one to show Magic late in life is that I think it would take something away from the power of her character. Yes, I'm sure JKR will make the Magic look cool and damn near all will cheer when they read it, but I think Figg is powerful without being Magic and I will be slightly disappointed. It's part of her intrigue: a member of the Order and the first line of Defense for Harry throughout his time with the Dursleys. . I think JKR nixed Petunia, but it would have been poetic if it were her: using magic to defend her loved ones who hate/fear magic. The dynamic of that aftermath brings a smile. . Just repeating myself. -Kemper [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From djklaugh at comcast.net Wed Jan 11 06:36:37 2006 From: djklaugh at comcast.net (Deb) Date: Wed, 11 Jan 2006 06:36:37 -0000 Subject: Mrs. Figg (Was: Dursleys) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146234 (snip) > Carol responds: (snip) > Mrs. Figg, however, is also a Squib (and like Filch, fits the "late in > life" requirement), and like him would know how to point a wand and > shout an incantation. (snip) At any rate, I like Mrs. Figg's spunk and she's in the books (and the > Order) for a reason. I think we'll find out what it is quite early in > Book 7 in the Battle of Privet Drive. > > Does anyone agree? If not, what do you think her role in Book 7 will > be? Could it have something to do with Mundungus Fletcher? > > Carol I agree, Carol, that Mrs Figg is the most likely candidate (IMO)for late-in-life use of magic. And I think she might actually have already done magic... In OOP (page 22 of the american hardback edition) she says (as she and Harry are trying to get Dudley home after the dementor attack) "Oh my dear, I wish it were so but I'm afraid -- MUNDUNGUS FLETCHER, I AM GOING TO KILL YOU!" There was a loud *crack* and a strong smell of mingled drink and stale tobacco filled the air as a squat, unshaven man in a tattered overcoat materialized right in front of them. ...... "'S' up, Figgy?" he said, staring from Mrs Figg to Harry and Dudley. "What 'appened to staying undercover?" ..... Now Mundungus was miles away seeing about the pilfered caldrons (and apparently having a drink) ... How, then, did Mrs Figg's voice - without benefit of megaphone, cellphone, or a magical *Sonorous* spell, reach all the way to where he was? She had previously told Harry she had no way to summons anyone from OOP and she was very distressed that DD would not hear of the dementor attack quickly enough to intervene with the MOM - even said that sending Hedwig would not be fast enough. Then, after lambasting MF for being absent, she sends him off (by Apparation) with a bug in his ear to tell DD and confess his dereliction of duty. Was this "emergency magic"? A Squib developing magical powers late in life? Or are all the OOP equiped with some type of spell that lets them hear cries for help? Deb (djklaugh) who wonders if Maine Coon cats might be related to Mrs Figg's Kneazle/cat crosses... cuz the coonies can read minds and hear the *whisper* of opening cans or foil packets over great distances From djklaugh at comcast.net Wed Jan 11 06:48:51 2006 From: djklaugh at comcast.net (Deb) Date: Wed, 11 Jan 2006 06:48:51 -0000 Subject: Nagini? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146235 > Pippin: > I can't find the reference, but years ago I read an interview with > JKR > in which she said the one thing she would change if she could is that > she didn't know when she wrote PS/SS that Boa Constrictors weren't > poisonous. So maybe the boa from PS/SS was originally intended to > be Voldemort's familiar in later books, and JKR had to change it. > Kelleyaynn: > > I hope she did have to change it, even if it would have been an > interesting twist. Can you imagine the guilt Harry would feel if the > snake he accidentally let loose turned into Nagini? The poor kid > already believes nearly everything is his fault. That would surely > have driven him 'round the bend. > > Kelleyaynn Ahhh yes but IF the boa had been Nagini then would the snake have owed Harry a life debt for setting it free from the zoo? Or if not a life debt, then just have felt less inclined to harm Harry because it was grateful to him? Deb (djklaugh) who has wondered what Nagini's purpose was in the graveyard scene in GOF... all she does is circle round and round - and where had she gotten to when the dome of light formed? From Aisbelmon at hotmail.com Wed Jan 11 07:08:14 2006 From: Aisbelmon at hotmail.com (M.Clifford) Date: Wed, 11 Jan 2006 07:08:14 -0000 Subject: Special treatment - yes or no/Rules In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146236 > > Orna: > > They had a good chance ? they sat there with their colors spread > > out ? doing nothing. They knew for some days how the points stood ? > > didn't have any meetings about this. Nobody said anything like > > the Gryffindors deserved it. > > Magpie: > > So since the Slytherins can't be faulted for their response to > Dumbledore's change of decorations, since none of them object > we'll resort to condemning them for not going to > Dumbledore at the first hint of rumor that Harry and his friends had > done something exceptional somewhere and taking themselves out of > the contest? Valky: LOL! Yeah, why not But sincerely, I don't think Orna is really saying that. She says that the Slytherin teams *did* have time and opportunity to use *if* they did want to act upon it. There was a comparison being made to the actions of Cedric Diggory at the end of the maze in GOF, Cedric acted on his conscience about Harry rescuing him and refused to take the advantage he had gained by virtue of Harry's well intended actions to win the Tournament. Cedric showed a great virtue to do that, but he didn't have to, and nor do I think Orna is saying that the Slytherins had to do the same, just that they weren't deprived of the opportunity. Valky From bboyminn at yahoo.com Wed Jan 11 08:59:25 2006 From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Wed, 11 Jan 2006 08:59:25 -0000 Subject: Humanity, Kant, Caricatures, and Draco - Perspective In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146237 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "horridporrid03" wrote: > ...edited... > Betsy Hp: > ... > > But in the world of fiction there are times where a bouncing > child *is* hilarious. Bugs Bunny cartoons, for example, ... > In Draco's case JKR tells us straight out that he is in pain. > And not an exaggerated form either. Draco is hurt and he's > trying to hide it. There's not a lot of cartoon humor in that. > > So we move on to the next criteria: Draco is so inhuman he > deserves to be brutalized. IOW, the situation calls for it. > ... > bboyminn: Let's not lose perspective here. First, if anyone provoked the situation, it was Draco. He started it by insulting, first, Ron's father, then Ron's mother, then Ron's home, then Ron's Mother again, and in the process, managed a mild insult toward Harry and an implied insult toward Ron with a clear and conscious intent to humilate Ron. Harry response with an insult directed at Draco's mother that is really an insult to Draco. Then turned to walked away, ready to let the situation end with an exchange of insults, an exchange in which Draco is still three (or more) points ahead. When Harry turned his back, Draco tried to curse him. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Malfoy's pale face went slightly pink. "Don't you dare insult my mother, Potter." "Keep your fat mouth shut, then," said Harry, turning away. BANG! ...Harry felt something white-hot graze the side of his face... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Something 'white-hot' grazed the side of Harry's face. That sounds pretty serious. I doubt that Draco tried to hit Harry with a fluffy bunny or a handfull of marshmallows. Then fake!Moody steps in, and does something that is clearly wrong and against the rules. McGonagall makes that clear. But here is the key point, while Draco was hurt, he wasn't harmed. That is, he did feel pain, but he wasn't injured. No bones were broken nor was any skin. At best he might have had some physical discomfort and some minor bruising. He walked away feeling, I suspect, more humiliated than in physical pain, though I don't doubt the presents of phsyical pain. The main point is, he walked away under his own power, and didn't appear to need any medical attention. He hurt, but he was not harmed. Next let us put that physical pain in prespective. This is a fictional world in which children play a game in which two cast iron cannon balls rocket around the pitch trying very much to cause both hurt and harm. This is also a world in which broken bones are fixed in seconds, as are cuts, scrapes, scratches, bruises, and assorted other minor injuries. This is also a world in which students deal with dangerous magical creatures, though certainly more dangerous than they should. It is also a world in which children deal this an assortment of dangerous and deadly plants. Not to mention Charms and Transfiguation classroom accidents. I really don't think you can take the sensibilities of our normal modern world and project them onto the wizard world. Danger is a normal part of every day life in this fictional world, and the kids seem to take this danger and the resulting injuries in stride. Also, keep in mind that soccer and American football are not exactly 'fluffy bunny' sports; they are rough, demanding, aggressive, and extremely physical. You can't really say that you don't want to experience pain, then go out for American or British football or rugby. My point here is that no life is devoid of pain. Bumps and bruises and scrapes are a part of every kids life, and just like the Hogwarts kids, most normal kids just take it in stride. So, from an adult perspective, Moody's action were wrong on every front. They were cruel, harsh, and against the rules. However, from a kids perspective, Draco was asking for it. He instigated and provoked the situation, then when he couldn't take even a fraction of what he was dishing out, Draco escalated the situation into an act of cowardly violence. Moody's response was certainly harsh, but sometimes harsh people only understand harsh punishment. Though, again, Moody's action were against school rules as McGonagall clearly points out to Moody. But Moody, even though he was a fake, is still a no nonsense kind of guy, and he certainly isn't the type to mollycoddle students. A 'good sharp shock' really is sometimes what a student needs to establish some perspective on their behavior. Moody's action certainly made a bigger impression on Draco than having him write lines. So while we can feel some sympathy for Draco, let's not go so far as to paint Draco as an innocent victim of Harry or a harsh no nonsense teacher. Let us also not confuse the perspective of teachers and other adults in the wizard world with the prespective of the kids in the wizard world. From a kids perspective, Draco got exactly what he deserved and exactly what he asked for (figuratively). And from either perspective, Draco really doesn't have anyone to blame but himself. If he had obeyed the rules and behaved himself, he wouldn't have suffered any consequences. Yes, Moody's actions were wrong, but on every front, Draco instigated, provoke, and escalated the stituation, and then paid a price for his ill behavior. Again, just trying to establish some perspective. Steve/bboyminn From finwitch at yahoo.com Wed Jan 11 10:52:02 2006 From: finwitch at yahoo.com (finwitch) Date: Wed, 11 Jan 2006 10:52:02 -0000 Subject: Mrs. Figg (Was: Dursleys) In-Reply-To: <43C4879F.3050103@sprynet.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146238 > Bart: > Let's list all the non-magical people we have met: > > 1) Filch > 2) Mrs. Figg > 3) The Dursleys > 4) Dr. & Mrs. Granger > 5) Ummmm.... uh..... hmmmmm..... > Finwitch: 5) Masons (Dinner guests at Dursleys in CoS) 6) Piers Poldiss&others of Draco's gang 7) Mark Evans(&Parents?) 8) the Railroad-staff member Harry asked about the Hogwarts Train (who quite obviously had no idea...) 9) The someone who asked what's going on when Harry crashed the trolley (CoS) 10) The poor Muggles in QWC being oblivated by Ministry and lifted into air by DEs. 11) The postman wondering about the stamps 12) The Muggles met during Vernon's attempt to avoid the post for Harry. Also - 7 of them saw Flying Car, and some Muggle saw Sirius far off Hogwarts... Finwitch From finwitch at yahoo.com Wed Jan 11 11:04:50 2006 From: finwitch at yahoo.com (finwitch) Date: Wed, 11 Jan 2006 11:04:50 -0000 Subject: Draco & Unforgivables; Krum?; Inflated Aunt vs. Sectumsempera; Sir; Dursleys In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146239 -> > La Gatta Lucianese: > > Totally cool! And Mrs. Norris will turn out to be part kneazle! > > They're going to need somebody who's part kneazle at Hogwarts, cause > Hermione and Crookshanks are coming up on graduation, and anyway, I > think Crookshanks is going to turn out to be R.A.B. in animagus form. > He was much too friendly with Sirius to be just a very perceptive cat. Finwitch: Sorry to spoil it, but JKR has told us that no, Crookshanks is NOT an animagus. He is a part Kneazle, though... One of Mrs Figg's, perhaps? I do like the idea of Mrs. Norris being one, though. Maybe she's FULL kneazle, though, and Harry&al. just THINK she's a cat? Not Hagrid, certainly - because he'd *sneeze* in presence of a cat, but not for a Kneazle... At least -- I haven't noticed Hagrid react to/avoid Mrs Norris, have you? Finwitch From mimbeltonia at yahoo.com Wed Jan 11 11:23:59 2006 From: mimbeltonia at yahoo.com (mimbeltonia) Date: Wed, 11 Jan 2006 11:23:59 -0000 Subject: Mrs. Figg (Was: Dursleys) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146240 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "finwitch" wrote: > > > > Bart: > > Let's list all the non-magical people we have met: > > > > 1) Filch > > 2) Mrs. Figg > > 3) The Dursleys > > 4) Dr. & Mrs. Granger > > 5) Ummmm.... uh..... hmmmmm..... > > > > Finwitch: > > 5) Masons (Dinner guests at Dursleys in CoS) > 6) Piers Poldiss&others of Draco's gang > 7) Mark Evans(&Parents?) > 8) the Railroad-staff member Harry asked about the Hogwarts Train (who > quite obviously had no idea...) > 9) The someone who asked what's going on when Harry crashed the > trolley (CoS) > 10) The poor Muggles in QWC being oblivated by Ministry and lifted > into air by DEs. > 11) The postman wondering about the stamps > 12) The Muggles met during Vernon's attempt to avoid the post for Harry. > > Also - 7 of them saw Flying Car, and some Muggle saw Sirius far off > Hogwarts... > > Finwitch > Mimbeltonia adds: 13) Aberforth Dumbledore, perhaps... Albus says that he is "not entirely sure Aberforth can read", and he is not described as doing any useful magic at any point. Can he also be a squib of sorts? I admit he has been charged of "inappropriate magic" involving goats, but maybe this has to do with him being ALMOST completely a squib... Mimbeltonia From willsonkmom at msn.com Wed Jan 11 12:06:08 2006 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Wed, 11 Jan 2006 12:06:08 -0000 Subject: Mrs. Figg (Was: Dursleys) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146241 > > Bart: > > Let's list all the non-magical people we have met: > > > > 1) Filch > > 2) Mrs. Figg > > 3) The Dursleys > > 4) Dr. & Mrs. Granger > > 5) Ummmm.... uh..... hmmmmm..... > > > > Finwitch: > > 5) Masons (Dinner guests at Dursleys in CoS) > 6) Piers Poldiss&others of Draco's gang > 7) Mark Evans(&Parents?) > 8) the Railroad-staff member Harry asked about the Hogwarts Train (who > quite obviously had no idea...) > 9) The someone who asked what's going on when Harry crashed the > trolley (CoS) > 10) The poor Muggles in QWC being oblivated by Ministry and lifted > into air by DEs. > 11) The postman wondering about the stamps > 12) The Muggles met during Vernon's attempt to avoid the post for Harry. > > Also - 7 of them saw Flying Car, and some Muggle saw Sirius far off > Hogwarts... Potioncat: Tobias Snape From h2so3f at yahoo.com Wed Jan 11 13:02:39 2006 From: h2so3f at yahoo.com (h2so3f) Date: Wed, 11 Jan 2006 13:02:39 -0000 Subject: Mundungus the Mole? ( WAS: Mrs. Figg) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146242 Deb wrote: "In OOP (page 22 of the american hardback edition) she says (as she and Harry are trying to get Dudley home after the dementor attack) ; "Oh my dear, I wish it were so but I'm afraid -- MUNDUNGUS FLETCHER, I AM GOING TO KILL YOU!" There was a loud *crack* and a strong smell of mingled drink and stale tobacco filled the air as a squat, unshaven man in a tattered overcoat materialized right in front of them. ... "'S' up, Figgy?" he said, staring from Mrs Figg to Harry and Dudley. "What 'appened to staying undercover?" ... Now Mundungus was miles away seeing about the pilfered caldrons (and apparently having a drink) ... How, then, did Mrs Figg's voice - without benefit of megaphone, cellphone, or a magical *Sonorous* spell, reach all the way to where he was? She had previously told Harry she had no way to summons anyone from OOP and she was very distressed that DD would not hear of the dementor attack quickly enough to intervene with the MOM - even said that sending Hedwig would not be fast enough. Then, after lambasting MF for being absent, she sends him off (by Apparation) with a bug in his ear to tell DD and confess his dereliction of duty. Was this "emergency magic"? A Squib developing magical powers late in life? Or are all the OOP equiped with some type of spell that lets them hear cries for help?" CH3ed: Yeah, I've often wondered about the timing of Dung's disappearance and Harry's dementors attack in OotP. How did Umbridge know when to send the dementors to attack Harry when his guard was off chasing a bunch of stolen cauldrons? The dementors were sent that same day and arrived in the hour Dung was absent...They weren't waiting for Harry when he came out of the house. It could all have been pure coincidence, of course, but it is rather conveneint. Dung, being a petty thief that he is, is probably in trouble with the law a lot. I wonder if he didn't cut some secret deal to get himself out of some legal trouble in telling Umbridge or her agent when Harry could be "visited" in private? The dude's ethics is clearly suspect (he got such kick out of re-selling some stuff he had stolen back to the owner(who was non the wiser for it). CH3ed smelling a tobacco-infested mole. From h2so3f at yahoo.com Wed Jan 11 13:39:30 2006 From: h2so3f at yahoo.com (h2so3f) Date: Wed, 11 Jan 2006 13:39:30 -0000 Subject: Horcrux and Lily Stepping Aside In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146244 Betsy Hp wrote: > No, no, it goes like this. Voldemort decends on the Potters. He > expects to clash with James. So he doesn't start the spell yet. But > *once James is out of the way* Voldemort figures the next kill will > be Harry, a Horcrux worthy death. (Zgirnius is right.) So he sends > his goons on ahead, chants his "super secret soul sealing spell" >(tm), and then heads in himself, all charged up to kill Harry and > create his final(?) Horcrux. But then Lily, that silly girl, gets > in the way and the rest is Potterverse history." CH3ed: But why would Voldy not expect Lily to be there with Harry and that she would try to fight him like James did? He clearly didn't expect her to shield Harry with her body and won't budge, but he should have expected her to be there and to be the next person he faces after James, ay? Granted that Voldy's mom didn't love him enough to stay alive for him, but then what Merope did was die giving birth to him. She didn't commit suicide while pregnant with him, so she only gave up her own life while wanting Tom to live. CH3ed :O) From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Wed Jan 11 13:51:48 2006 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Wed, 11 Jan 2006 13:51:48 -0000 Subject: Humanity, Kant, Caricatures, and Draco /Train scene again/Slytherins and Quiddit In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146245 Betsy: > > > Interestingly enough, the twins have less of an excuse for > > > their attack from behind. It's not like Cedric was their > > > friend, and it's not like Draco was interacting with them. Nora: > > Of course, Draco does indicate that Ron and Hermione are next, > > which I do suspect the Twins might have some interest in. Alla: > Not only that Nora, but Harry is their friend, and Harry just had > been through horrible ordeal and Draco shows up uninvited to their > compartment and starts mocking Cedric's death and issuing death > threats to Ron and Hermione. Pure provocation, IMO. > > "Too late now, Potter! They'll be the first to go, now the Dark > Lord's back! Mudbloods and Muggle-lovers first! Well - second - > Diggory was the f----" - GoF, paperback, p.720 > I am trying to remember my first reaction to this scene. I don't > think I laughed here at Draco's misfortune. But I sure did not feel > much sympathy for him either. To me he was unquestionable > provocateur. SSSusan: Oh, I remember my first reaction to reading this scene. I was *totally* dumbstruck and *totally* pissed at Draco's insensitivity. I believe I may have even said aloud, "What a prick!" It wasn't even the threats to Ron & Hermione so much, which I suppose one could argue were "same old, same old" for Draco; it was mostly his CRASSNESS and CRUELTY in saying "Well - second - Diggory was the f [irst]." Oooooh!! In my opinion, in that moment, that action of Draco's meant that he deserved to be come down upon. As Alla pointed out, HE came to their compartment and HE initiated this "conversation." His aggressive and cruel actions and words brought about the result. And that result was just fine by me. Nora: > > Not that he's somehow less human, but he *is* consistently the > > wrongly motivated and openly malicious party. Does that mean JKR > > gives him more lumps and lets him get away with less, and she > > slants his actions differently, that something may be okay when > > someone else does it but not when he does 'the same thing'? > > > > Yes. Alla: > Agreed. It would be interesting if in book 7 Draco starts to > experience true character change ( no I don't consider the > inability to kill the Headmaster while facing him to be true > character change, but I do think that it could be a first sign for > such change), how would JKR evaluate his actions them. SSSusan: Yes, I concur with Nora. JKR may well give Draco more lumps and let him get away with less, but this does not, in my view, make Draco less "human" than others. In fact, for me, it is his very humanness - - his ability to make individual choices, his own decisions to be such a twit -- which make the lumps seem appropriate. I don't see him as a puppet or as an automaton but as a human being capable of making choices just like Harry, Hermione and Neville do. Shaped by his environment, of course, but any more than the others are?? To me it's simply the actions JKR writes for Draco and the motivations which underlie them that make his "more lumps" hunky dory for me and for many. You know -- actions have consequences, and sometimes *cumulative* actions mean the consequences are more severe than for someone who's not been a git the whole way through. This is not to say I've written Draco off or that, no matter what he does, I want to see him "get his." I'm not that kind of person. No, I'm with Alla, too, in wondering about book 7. Draco DID change in 6th year, and he did become a much more fully-fleshed out character who STRUGGLED. It was definitely easier to have more sympathy for him in HBP than in earlier books because we got to see some struggle WITHIN Draco, not just the arrogant, cocky, sneering, threatening, "I'M right"ness that we'd seen in him for so long. (Yes, some of that earlier stuff was seen through Harry's eyes, but goodness, many of the actions and statements speak for themselves and weren't "tainted" by Harry's POV.) I could see Draco's story and character going many different ways in book 7, and if a "true change" is coming, I'll be fascinated and definitely inclined to cut him some slack. Is that UNFAIR to say I'll cut him more slack if he stops being cruel, insulting, bigoted and threatening? Maybe to some, but not to me. Siriusly Snapey Susan From lowndes at bigpond.net.au Wed Jan 11 09:15:56 2006 From: lowndes at bigpond.net.au (Marg McKay-Lowndes) Date: Wed, 11 Jan 2006 19:15:56 +1000 Subject: Nagini? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <000b01c6168f$a153dcc0$0100000a@lan> No: HPFGUIDX 146246 Hi A few people have been comparing the boa constrictor of book 1 with Nagini of later installments. It occurred to me that the differences in the way JKR portrays the snake in book 1 compared to the snake in Books 5 and 6 (ie Nagini) serves to highlight the darker nature of the later books. In the first book, the treatment of the snake is of an amusing but harmless incident because the snake is not venomous. Later, however, the appearance of the snake has menacing overtones. The snake is a symbol of Voldemort's cunning. Therefore, I think that even if JKR did not intentionally make the Book 1 snake harmless, it works better this way as a narrative. Just as the books are about Harry's journey from innocence into the heart of darkness, the trappings around him (ie snakes) are also becoming more sinister. Cheers MML From lowndes at bigpond.net.au Wed Jan 11 08:44:47 2006 From: lowndes at bigpond.net.au (Marg McKay-Lowndes) Date: Wed, 11 Jan 2006 18:44:47 +1000 Subject: Humanity, Kant, Caricatures, and Draco (was Re: Real child abuse) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <000101c6168b$4886d920$0100000a@lan> No: HPFGUIDX 146247 Betsy Hp: > And yet, Draco doesn't attack in a vacuum. He *doesn't* instigate. Harry has just insulted his mother. So Draco does have motivation, and rather noble motivation as well (as any schoolboy can tell you). Not that Draco is pure as the driven snow. He did insult Molly. But this isn't a case of Draco launching an attack out of nowhere.> MML here: [MML] Yees, Harry has just insulted Draco's mother, who happens to be a Death Eater, full of hate and venom, with the only redeeming feature being her desire to save her son from a woeful fate. In other words, in seeking to insult the Malfoys, Harry has a plethora of material to draw from. I think in analysing the characters in the book, it is wise to look beyond mere actions, and really closely examine motive and the moral stance which each character takes ("It is not our actions which determine who we are Harry, but our choices" :- Dumbledore said this somewhere, not sure whether in movie and/or book, but nevertheless for me it sums JKR's attitudes towards her characters). Put simply, Harry is fighting for the good, Malfoy is fighting for the evil (pure-blood wizardry) and it is this moral stance which renders their actions right or wrong. CHeers MML who has no idea where this fits into Kantian philosophy. From lowndes at bigpond.net.au Wed Jan 11 09:05:33 2006 From: lowndes at bigpond.net.au (Marg McKay-Lowndes) Date: Wed, 11 Jan 2006 19:05:33 +1000 Subject: Percy In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <000601c6168e$2e254780$0100000a@lan> No: HPFGUIDX 146248 DB wrote: What does everyone think will go on with Percy in HP7? What will his role be, etc., etc.? [MML] here: In the interests of a happy ending and tying up all the loose ends, I think it will be essential for Percy to confront the error of his ways, repent, and reunite with his parents. Arthur and Molly are condemned to eternal sorrow otherwise. I guess the shippers might also want to see him marry whats-her-name with whom he was in love. I think he will always be an amibtious bureaucrat, but will make sure he is making sounder judgements. He may even end up in a very high position in the Ministry, though not Minister for Magic, because he is not clever or cunning enough to be a politician. MML From mudblood68 at yahoo.de Wed Jan 11 11:13:25 2006 From: mudblood68 at yahoo.de (Claudia) Date: Wed, 11 Jan 2006 11:13:25 -0000 Subject: Spies, Lies and Self fullfilling prophecies In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146249 kchuplis wrote: > What I was wondering is can you guys think of other SFP in the books. I > really think there are more, but I'm really brain dead right now. I think this is an > important running motif. It may give us clues for Book 7. > > kchuplis > Claudia: Neville Longbottom. He is the walking self fullfilling prophecy of his Grandmother's way of thinking about him. And I do believe it is important for Book 7 that Neville is growing out of it - if only for his own development. Claudia From zarleycat at sbcglobal.net Wed Jan 11 14:35:29 2006 From: zarleycat at sbcglobal.net (kiricat4001) Date: Wed, 11 Jan 2006 14:35:29 -0000 Subject: Draco (was: Humanity, Kant, Caricatures, and Draco /Train. etc) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146250 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "cubfanbudwoman" SSS: No, > I'm with Alla, too, in wondering about book 7. Draco DID change in > 6th year, and he did become a much more fully-fleshed out character > who STRUGGLED. It was definitely easier to have more sympathy for > him in HBP than in earlier books because we got to see some struggle > WITHIN Draco, not just the arrogant, cocky, sneering, > threatening, "I'M right"ness that we'd seen in him for so long. > > I could see Draco's story and character going many different ways in > book 7, and if a "true change" is coming, I'll be fascinated and > definitely inclined to cut him some slack. Is that UNFAIR to say > I'll cut him more slack if he stops being cruel, insulting, bigoted > and threatening? Maybe to some, but not to me. Marianne: Draco's progression into a more human character was a welcome development for me, too, in HBP. I hope he's got the sense or brains or guts to start thinking for himself and not continue blindly following his parents' lead. I have a tough time imagining that Draco will make a major break with the heritage and attitudes that have been ingrained into him because he's never questioned them, that we could see. (Yes, I know - Harry's POV, so of course we don't see Draco lying sleepless in bed, night after night, banging his forehead muttering, "Why did I call her a Mudblood? That's so not nice!") But, I'll be happy to see it, assuming we the readers *do* actually see it and are not simply presented with Reformed!Draco springing out of a hiding place to sign up to be Harry's ally. It's the same thing for me as remorseful Snape. I want to see it. I don't want to hear about it second-hand. Marianne From coverton at netscape.com Wed Jan 11 05:21:02 2006 From: coverton at netscape.com (corey_over) Date: Wed, 11 Jan 2006 05:21:02 -0000 Subject: wonder who is guarding Azkaban now that the dementors are not there anymore. Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146251 Hi members. Just posting to keep my hand in. So you guys won't forget about me. Here is something I just thought of. Who is guarding Azkaban now that the Dementors are no more? Is it some of the left over Inferi or some other creatures or wizards or witches? Just throwing it out and seeing what happens. Your fellow member, Corey From kelleyaynn at yahoo.com Wed Jan 11 15:08:32 2006 From: kelleyaynn at yahoo.com (kelleyaynn) Date: Wed, 11 Jan 2006 15:08:32 -0000 Subject: Muggles in the books and Nagini In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146252 >Bart: >Let's list all the non-magical people we have met: >1) Filch >2) Mrs. Figg >3) The Dursleys >4) Dr. & Mrs. Granger >5) Ummmm.... uh..... hmmmmm..... Kelleyaynn: That would be Drs. Granger. They are both dentists. Also, we've met Uncle Vernon's sister. Deb: > > Ahhh yes but IF the boa had been Nagini then would the snake have > owed Harry a life debt for setting it free from the zoo? Or if not a > life debt, then just have felt less inclined to harm Harry because > it was grateful to him? Kelleyaynn: Good point. Perhaps that is why Wormtail now owes Harry a life debt. Maybe that life debt was intended for Nagini first, but since the original snake was a boa, that couldn't work out and JKR switched it to Pettigrew. Kelleyaynn From kchuplis at alltel.net Wed Jan 11 15:28:55 2006 From: kchuplis at alltel.net (Karen) Date: Wed, 11 Jan 2006 09:28:55 -0600 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Horcrux and Lily Stepping Aside References: Message-ID: <001401c616c3$bbea0df0$b301010a@ConsolidatedTelephone.local> No: HPFGUIDX 146253 >Granted that Voldy's mom didn't love him enough to stay alive for him, >but then what Merope did was die giving birth to him. She didn't >commit suicide while pregnant with him, so she only gave up her own >life while wanting Tom to live. >CH3ed :O) That wouldn't matter to LV I don't think. This guy is not the most logical thinker in the world. He also tends (like many of us) to assume everyone would believe as he does and life is better than death. I think he does learn a bit by experience, but overall, Voldy has a conspicuous tendancy not to learn from his mistakes about love and death. (It seems to me anyway.) I really *don't* think he would automatically expect Lily to sacrifice herself. kchuplis [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From jelly92784 at yahoo.com Wed Jan 11 16:37:28 2006 From: jelly92784 at yahoo.com (jelly92784) Date: Wed, 11 Jan 2006 16:37:28 -0000 Subject: Knowledge about Lily and James Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146254 Re-reading book one I came across an interesting passage: " 'I'd be careful if I were you, Potter' [Malfoy] said slowly. 'Unless you're a bit politer you'll go the same way as your parents. They didn't know what was good for them, either. You hang around riffraff like the Weasleys and that Hagrid, and it'll rub off on you' "(107 Scholastic Hardcover). I was wondering what Malfoy might've heard about Lily and James that would make him say this. Is it just his knowledge that they had been anti-Voldemort or is it something more? Has he heard things from his father or things that are generally known about the Potters? What do you guys think? From nrenka at yahoo.com Wed Jan 11 16:53:19 2006 From: nrenka at yahoo.com (nrenka) Date: Wed, 11 Jan 2006 16:53:19 -0000 Subject: Humanity, Kant, Caricatures, and Draco (was Re: Real child abuse) In-Reply-To: <000101c6168b$4886d920$0100000a@lan> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146255 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Marg McKay-Lowndes" wrote: > MML here: > I think in analysing the characters in the book, it is wise to look > beyond mere actions, and really closely examine motive and the > moral stance which each character takes ("It is not our actions > which determine who we are Harry, but our choices" :- Dumbledore > said this somewhere, not sure whether in movie and/or book, but > nevertheless for me it sums JKR's attitudes towards her characters). Actually, he doesn't say that. He says that our choices *show* who we are, not determine. It's a slight change of wording, but it may well be meaningful because of where it puts the source of things. If that philosophical point ultimately matters. > Put simply, Harry is fighting for the good, Malfoy > is fighting for the evil (pure-blood wizardry) and it is this moral > stance which renders their actions right or wrong. > > CHeers > MML who has no idea where this fits into Kantian philosophy. Kant says at one point (paraphrasing) that the only perfectly good thing is the perfectly good will, which is also perfectly rational. That means the "I thought it was the right thing" excuse doesn't work for things which are actually evil, as determined by Kant's moral principles--it takes subjectivity out of play. So he makes intentions (the good will) primary. Also, every person should be treated as an end in himself, and never as a means to an end. He's kinda the anti-Slytherin in that way. :) Speaking of something which made me think, I got the impression that the "enemy of my enemy is my friend" proposition was solidly rejected at the end of the book, with Harry refusing to ally or explain anything to Scrimgeour. The resources of the Ministry would be useful, wouldn't they? Lesser of two evils, making an alliance there? But it was rejected out of hand. Is this a moral issue, or is it more plot-driven with the Trio going it alone? -Nora was wrong in guessing for Ministry reform and/or reconciliation this book, alas From mgrantwich at yahoo.com Wed Jan 11 16:56:41 2006 From: mgrantwich at yahoo.com (Magda Grantwich) Date: Wed, 11 Jan 2006 08:56:41 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] RE: Humanity, Kant, Caricatures, and Draco (was Re: Real child abuse) In-Reply-To: <000101c6168b$4886d920$0100000a@lan> Message-ID: <20060111165641.88327.qmail@web53105.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 146256 > MML here: > Yees, Harry has just insulted Draco's mother, who happens to > be a Death Eater, full of hate and venom, with the only > redeeming feature being her desire to save her son from a > woeful fate.... Not unlike Lily Potter, hmm? Moms are like that. The desire to save Draco (and probably Lucius, although he's safe in Azkaban at the moment) and in the process to defy Voldemort is actually pretty impressive on Narcissa's part - which is why we have Bellatrix right beside her giving us the DE-approved version of motherly love. > Put simply, Harry is > fighting for the good, Malfoy is fighting for the evil (pure- > blood wizardry) and it is this moral stance > which renders their actions right or wrong. Which would be fine if morality were like a big quidditch game with teams clearly identifiable and no holds barred. But right and wrong is a bit more complicated than that. You can do bad things and then repent, and strive to do better or make up for your past. And Harry's showing himself a bit too quick to throw those unforgiveables around for us (and him) to assume that his place on Team Good Guys is assured and unassailable. And FWIW, "pureblood wizardry" isn't in and of itself evil. There's a verse in the bible (can't remember where) that says something like there will be more rejoicing in heaven over one sinner who repents than over ten others who never sinned at all. Something for the good guys to remember lest they start to get smug. Magda __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com From Wink45zes at aol.com Wed Jan 11 16:54:16 2006 From: Wink45zes at aol.com (Wink45zes at aol.com) Date: Wed, 11 Jan 2006 11:54:16 EST Subject: Mrs. Figg (Was: Dursleys) Message-ID: <1fc.105580c6.30f69238@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 146257 Kemper writes: What I don't like about Mrs. Figg being the one to show Magic late in life is that I think it would take something away from the power of her character. Yes, I'm sure JKR will make the Magic look cool and damn near all will cheer when they read it, but I think Figg is powerful without being Magic and I will be slightly disappointed. It's part of her intrigue: a member of the Order and the first line of Defense for Harry throughout his time with the Dursleys. Wink45: I agree. I rather admire Mrs. Figg. She has accepted her lack of magical abilities and has made a life for herself that serves both the wizarding and mundane worlds. Filch has never accepted being a Squib, and there is something to be said for never giving up hope. He may be insanely jealous of the students' abilities, and derive his only pleasures from what scraps of power he has over then, but I do think that he loves Hogwarts, and I can imagine him coming *magically* to its defense. Wink45 [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From c.john at imperial.ac.uk Wed Jan 11 17:24:41 2006 From: c.john at imperial.ac.uk (esmith222002) Date: Wed, 11 Jan 2006 17:24:41 -0000 Subject: Knowledge about Lily and James In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146258 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "jelly92784" wrote: > > I was wondering what Malfoy might've heard about Lily and James that > would make him say this. Is it just his knowledge that they had been > anti-Voldemort or is it something more? Has he heard things from his > father or things that are generally known about the Potters? What do > you guys think? > At the end of book 2, when Harry confronts Lucius Malfoy, he makes the comment that Harry's parents were 'meddlesome fools as well'. Is this just a reference to their belonging to the Order of the Pheonix and obviously being involved in the fight against Voldemort, or does it refer to some specific act that the Potters had perpetrated? Who knows? Brothergib From c.john at imperial.ac.uk Wed Jan 11 17:28:45 2006 From: c.john at imperial.ac.uk (esmith222002) Date: Wed, 11 Jan 2006 17:28:45 -0000 Subject: Chapter 1 POA Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146259 Having just started reading POA to my six year old son, I was surprised to find further reference to Bill Weasley's role as a curse breaker. Not only that, but Bill was apparently working on some paricularly complex and nasty curses set by the ancient Egyptians. This led me; 1). To increase my confidence of the importance of Bill's role in destroying Horcruxes in book 7 2). To further marvel at JKR and the clues she manages to leave throughout her books. Brothergib From tonks_op at yahoo.com Wed Jan 11 18:17:31 2006 From: tonks_op at yahoo.com (Tonks) Date: Wed, 11 Jan 2006 18:17:31 -0000 Subject: magic late in life In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146260 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "justcarol67" wrote: > Filch, I agree, is a better candidate, being a Squib and constantly in the presence of magic. And he certainly *wants* to learn magic, as evidenced by the Qwikspell course. But he's also unpredictable and his ethics are questionable. He believes in harsh punishment, even torture, for students, and he admired Umbridge. And he's at Hogwarts, while Harry won't be there, at least not for the majority of the book. Tonks here: I think that the most likely candidate is Filch. But the question will be, what side will he be on?? Is he a bitter man because of what he lacks and when he gets it will change his ways? Or is his lack of magic because of some "block" within in him. By that I mean mentally, something of his own personality holding him back. Is it even a good idea for the gift of magic to be given to someone like him? Will the Dark Lord give him the key to magic in exchange for something else? Will he sell his soul for it? Does he love Hogwarts enough to rise to her defense and then the magic will be there? Will he be on the side of the good and do something incredible at the end? There are many ways that she can use Filch in book 7. Tonks_op From ibchawz at yahoo.com Wed Jan 11 18:22:45 2006 From: ibchawz at yahoo.com (ibchawz) Date: Wed, 11 Jan 2006 18:22:45 -0000 Subject: Mrs. Figg (Was: Dursleys) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146261 Finwitch wrote: 6) Piers Poldiss&others of Draco's gang ibchawz responds: I believe that should be Piers Polkiss of Dudley's gang. Somehow I can't imagine Draco having Muggles in his gang. There is an extensive list at the Harry Potter Lexicon (www.hp- lexicon.org/muggle/muggle_people.html) ibchawz From ornawn at 013.net Wed Jan 11 18:47:15 2006 From: ornawn at 013.net (ornadv) Date: Wed, 11 Jan 2006 18:47:15 -0000 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Mrs. Figg (Was: Dursleys) Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146262 >kchuplis: >I found it most interesting that at the end of GoF when Dumbledore >is rallying the troups he includes Mrs. Figg: Page 713: "You are to >alert Remus Lupin, Arabella Figg, Mundungus Fletcher - the old >crowd." There she is, listed right in with the Order of the Phoenix >gang "the old crowd". >Kemper now: >I don't think Figgy saw the Dementors. I think she recognized a >Dementor attack and recognized Harry's attempted and successful >defense against it. Maybe she witnessed one or more in the past. Orna: I agree with kchuplis ? it's a suggestive part ? because it doesn't include everyone by name, and Figgy is mentioned. It seems Figgy is quite an equal member in the exquisite club. Perhaps it's the other way round ? Perhaps Figgy is a wizard (it was suggested a hiding one ? polyjuiced). She is very strongly telling Harry she can't do any magic, so perhaps... she can, and quite a bit. After all, she must be a good poser to have been looking to Harry as an old lady infatuated with cats. When she tells Fudge this, he doesn't know anything about this ? he says they'll be checking it, but I doubt if they did. So we don't really know who she is. I propose, she did see the dementors, but didn't know how to appear in the trial as a squib, just like wizards are very poor at understand muggles way of thinking. So she tried the best story she could think about ? I mean she doesn't know how dementors appear to squibs or muggles, so she tries to describe them as she has seen them in pictures. But when she saw it didn't work ? she told the feeling they aroused in her- this time sounding much more reliable. So I don't see her as a candidate for late magic, but for another mystery person. Orna From hickengruendler at yahoo.de Wed Jan 11 20:49:53 2006 From: hickengruendler at yahoo.de (hickengruendler) Date: Wed, 11 Jan 2006 20:49:53 -0000 Subject: magic late in life In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146263 > > Tonks here: > I think that the most likely candidate is Filch. But the question > will be, what side will he be on?? Is he a bitter man because of > what he lacks and when he gets it will change his ways? Or is his > lack of magic because of some "block" within in him. By that I mean > mentally, something of his own personality holding him back. Is it > even a good idea for the gift of magic to be given to someone like > him? Will the Dark Lord give him the key to magic in exchange for > something else? Hickengruendler: JKR said, that the person will do magic in "desperate circumstances". Therefore I don't think Voldemort will offer anyone to give them magic, if they fight for his side. I highly doubt, that's even possible, otherwise you would think that Filch already had asked Dumbledore to give him some magic. I am and always was a fan of the theory, that it's Filch, for two reasons. a.) He's a bigger character than Mrs Figg and therefore it seems more likely to me, that he will do something important. b.) Mrs Figg seems to be a pretty strong character even without the magic. I kind of admire her for rushing to help, when she realized there were Dementors around, even though she knew that she was helpless. She found her niche in life even without magic, while Filch, in spite of having a secure job, doesn't. Therefore, IMO Filch needs the magic more. I think both Hogwarts and the Dursley house will be attacked in book 7 and therefore both Filch and Figg are still legitimate candidates, but I would prefer Filch. Hickengruendler From bawilson at citynet.net Wed Jan 11 19:14:41 2006 From: bawilson at citynet.net (bawilson at citynet.net) Date: Wed, 11 Jan 2006 14:14:41 -0500 (EST) Subject: Draco and Dentists Message-ID: <23251402.1137006881295.JavaMail.administrator@webmail> No: HPFGUIDX 146264 SSSusan: "Oh, I remember my first reaction to reading this scene. I was *totally* dumbstruck and *totally* pissed at Draco's insensitivity. I believe I may have even said aloud, "What a prick!" It wasn't even the threats to Ron & Hermione so much, which I suppose one could argue were "same old, same old" for Draco; it was mostly his CRASSNESS and CRUELTY in saying "Well - second - Diggory was the f[irst]." Oooooh!! In my opinion, in that moment, that action of Draco's meant that he deserved to be come down upon. As Alla pointed out, HE came to their compartment and HE initiated this "conversation." His aggressive and cruel actions and words brought about the result. And that result was just fine by me." BAW: Exactly. What Draco said--not to mention how and when he said it--was totally unforgiveable. Any consequences he brought on himself. And remember, the multiple hexings were not a planned ambush--each hex was a spontaneous, unplanned, and uncoordinated response. That they all happened at the same time and interacted in a totally unpredictable way was just 'icing on the cake.' "Kelleyaynn: That would be Drs. Granger. They are both dentists. Also, we've met Uncle Vernon's sister." BAW: Correct me if I am wrong, but I was under the impression that in the UK only MEDICAL doctors were called 'doctor.' Dentists, veterenarians, chiropractors, etc. are all 'mister.' BAW. From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Wed Jan 11 21:00:31 2006 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Wed, 11 Jan 2006 21:00:31 -0000 Subject: Nagini etymology + snakes' lifespan? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146265 CH3ed: > I wonder how loyal Nagini is (I mean, snakes aren't often portrayed > as epitome for that trait), considering that LV probably shortened > her life needlessly by possessing her when he went to case out the > DoM (and bit Arthur in the process) in OotP. I'm assuming that LV's > speech in the GoF graveyard scene that possession shortens the > snakes' life span applies. Couldn't LV have used L. Malfoy instead? SSSusan: Hee. I know you didn't mean it this way, but when I read the sentence "Couldn't LV have used L. Malfoy instead?," I admit that my mind thought you meant couldn't LV have **possessed* Lucius instead of Nagini. So I had this visual image of Voldy-in-Lucius, making him do all kinds of stuff like a puppeteer, and of its shortening Lucius' life. As if Nagini is more valuable to Voldy in the end, and he'd surely want to preserve the length of her life over Lucius's. Of course, you meant use him to scope out the DoM, but my first reaction was "funner." ;-) Siriusly Snapey Susan, submitting a totally worthless post, but hey.... From bboyminn at yahoo.com Wed Jan 11 21:03:54 2006 From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Wed, 11 Jan 2006 21:03:54 -0000 Subject: Mrs. Figg (Was: Dursleys) In-Reply-To: <43C4879F.3050103@sprynet.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146266 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Bart Lidofsky wrote: > > potioncat wrote: > > Potioncat: > > I vote for Figgy. Wouldn't be surprised if she isn't someone's > > sister...heck it would be funny if she was Eileen Prince's > > sister...OK..erm... > > Bart: > Let's list all the non-magical people we have met: > > 1) Filch > 2) Mrs. Figg > 3) The Dursleys > 4) Dr. & Mrs. Granger > 5) Ummmm.... uh..... hmmmmm..... > bboyminn: First, the Dursleys are THREE people, not one, and four people if you count Aunt Marge, and the Grangers are TWO people. And to an even more minor point, it's Mr.-Dr. Granger and Mrs.-Dr. Granger. Both Hermione's parents are Dentists. Next, as others have mentioned a long and obscure list of Muggles, I think it is most likely to be a latent magical person who is significant in the story. It's not likely that in the heat of battle Mrs. Number 7 - Privet Drive will come scurrying out of her house casting Stunning Curses. Nor is Mark Evans likely to come riding by on his bicycle, discover a battle in progress, and start curing every DE in sight. These are much too obscure characters to play a significant role. JKR has flat out said it will not be Petunia. She has also said that Dudley is just Dudley, what you see is what you get, so it is not likely to be him. I personally don't think it is likely to be Uncle Vernon. He seems too set in his character. Though anything could happen if his family is attacked, but I still think it is unlikely. I also can't imagine any circumstance in which Aunt Marge would get involved. If Ron and Hermione are really going to stay at the Dursleys, then the spare bedroom will be occupied, and it is unlikely that Aunt Marge will be able to visit. That really only leaves two characters that I can think of; Filch and Figg. Now we have to conceive of the likelihood of a situation occuring in which one of these characters could be prompted into magical action. We have already had an attack on Hogwarts and Filch was no where to be seen. He doesn't seem the type to go charging into battle. Nor does he seem to care about anyone enough to be prompted to come to their defense. Now Figgy, on the other hand, seems very feisty. She came to Harry's aid quick enough in OotP, though she didn't arrive early enough to be pushed into any magical action. She has been in the Order since the beginning which again indicates a willingness to fight in whatever way she can. Further, we are all speculating on an attack on the Dursley's home or at least on Harry while he is there. Though, that has already been done as well. Still we know Harry's protection at the Dursleys is waning. When he turns 17, he becomes as vulnerable there as he is everywhere. Though, in a sense, he is probably more vulnerable because, being the good guy that he is, Harry wouldn't hesitate to defend the Dursleys. Still, even the timing of an attack on the Dursleys doesn't quite seem right. Harry has a lot of plans for the summer, and I can't see him hanging around the Dursley for four whole weeks. I say two at best. Then he is off to Gordic's Hollow, back for the Weasley wedding, then off to his life, the Horcrux hunt, and the final battle with Voldemort. For there to be an attack on the Dursleys, Harry needs an excuse to return to the Dursleys after he has left and after he turns 17; I really can't come up with a good excuse for this return, and I can't come up with any likelihood of a DE attack before Harry turns 17. The Grangers, Hermione's parents, are also too obscure. They seem to be muggles and nothing more. Of course, we can speculate an attack on them in an attempt to get at Harry, but that seems a very obscure and unlikely route of attack. So, whether right or wrong, I see the Grangers as out of the picture as they have always been. As far as I can see only one character stands out sufficiently in the story to be a likely candidate and that is Mrs. Figg. I'm not completely ruling out Filch, but he seems unlikely to get into a circumstance in which his latent magic might show itself. All other characters seem too obscure and too deep in the background to make such a great leap in to the foreground. Just a few thoughts. Steve/bboyminn From iam.kemper at gmail.com Wed Jan 11 21:16:55 2006 From: iam.kemper at gmail.com (Kemper) Date: Wed, 11 Jan 2006 13:16:55 -0800 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: magic late in life In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <700201d40601111316n30f93872hd7b8f8af13cc165c@mail.gmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 146267 On 1/11/06, hickengruendler wrote: > > > Hickengruendler: > > JKR said, that the person will do magic in "desperate circumstances". > Therefore I don't think Voldemort will offer anyone to give them > magic, if they fight for his side. I highly doubt, that's even > possible, otherwise you would think that Filch already had asked > Dumbledore to give him some magic. I am and always was a fan of the > theory, that it's Filch, for two reasons. > > a.) He's a bigger character than Mrs Figg and therefore it seems more > likely to me, that he will do something important. > b.) Mrs Figg seems to be a pretty strong character even without the > magic. I kind of admire her for rushing to help, when she realized > there were Dementors around, even though she knew that she was > helpless. She found her niche in life even without magic, while > Filch, in spite of having a secure job, doesn't. Therefore, IMO Filch > needs the magic more. > > I think both Hogwarts and the Dursley house will be attacked in book > 7 and therefore both Filch and Figg are still legitimate candidates, > but I would prefer Filch. > > Hickengruendler .. .. Kemper now: Reading other threads as well, I don't like the idea of Filch either, but would feel better if the desperate circumstances is saving Madam Pince from harm or death. That way it is the power of love (I'm assuming, as many are, that they have romantic trists) that brings about Filch's unrevealed magic. If this is the situation, then I'm all for Filch being the one late in life. But I will never, regardless of circumstanse, be okay with Figgy being the one. -Kemper [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From katmac at katmac.cncdsl.com Wed Jan 11 21:48:54 2006 From: katmac at katmac.cncdsl.com (lagattalucianese) Date: Wed, 11 Jan 2006 21:48:54 -0000 Subject: Mrs. Figg (Was: Dursleys) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146268 > ... > > Potioncat: > Tobias Snape > La Gatta Lucianese: Mr. Tonks (Andromeda's husband, Tonks' dad). From horridporrid03 at yahoo.com Wed Jan 11 22:25:24 2006 From: horridporrid03 at yahoo.com (horridporrid03) Date: Wed, 11 Jan 2006 22:25:24 -0000 Subject: Humanity, Kant, Caricatures, and Draco - Perspective In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146269 > >>bboyminn: > Let's not lose perspective here. > Betsy Hp: Gee, thanks, Steve! Okay, so in the interest of keeping things in perspective let me go back to my original statement. It is odd, if not illogical, to argue that using sarcasm against a child is child abuse, but bouncing a child on a stone floor is a reasonable form of discipline. Replies were given saying that the above statement is not true because these books have characters of different worth. IOW, some characters are more human or realistic than others. And while I think that sort of argument could hold water in a Roald Dahl book, I don't think it holds as true in the Potterverse. JKR does have caricitures in her books, from time to time, but I think, for the most part, she tries to keep her characters fairly realistic. (Especially compared to Dahl.) So, I would say that the characters are indeed equal -- at least in terms of their humanity or realism. So if sarcasm (or unfair point taking, etc.) is considered brutal behavior, so should bouncing a child on a stone floor. Unless it can be shown that Draco is a cartoonish character, that he's not as realistic as Harry, not as human as Harry, saying that a teacher who is mean to Harry (insults his parents, takes points unfairly, etc.) is an abuser, but a teacher who physically assults Draco (JKR tells us he was hurt by the treatment) is not an abuser, becomes an exercise in doublespeak. IMO. Which is why I went through some effort to show that Draco is neither a cartoon nor a cariciture. [I want to add that the amount of time spent with a character, while increasing our sympathy or empathy, doesn't go towards that character's realism. At least, not how I'm defining it. When we learn Hannah Abbott's parents were killed we don't sympathize to the extent we would if it were Hermione, but neither do we say that Hannah isn't suffering the same amount of grief Hermione would in that sort of situation.] > >>bboyminn: > So, from an adult perspective, Moody's action were wrong on every > front. They were cruel, harsh, and against the rules. > Betsy Hp: Exactly what I was saying. So I *have* kept my perspective. > >>bboyminn: > However, from a kids perspective, Draco was asking for it. He > instigated and provoked the situation, then when he couldn't take > even a fraction of what he was dishing out, Draco escalated the > situation into an act of cowardly violence. > Betsy Hp: I agree, Draco was asking for it. And if Harry and Ron had jumped him at this point, or if he'd lost tons of house points from Slytherin and earned a detention to boot he'd have only himself to blame. But it was beyond weird for Fake!Moody to get involved in the manner he did. Of course, we learn later that Fake!Moody (who loves to attack from behind) was just looking for an excuse. > >>bboyminn: > Moody's response was certainly harsh, but sometimes harsh people > only understand harsh punishment. > Betsy Hp: Out of curiosity, how would Fake!Moody even know what sort of person Draco is? I mean, how could he suddenly leap to the conclusion that Draco is a harsh boy? He's been in Azkaban or under house arrest for most of Draco's life. And while Fake!Moody probably knew Lucius, Draco is not much like his dad. > >>bboyminn: > So while we can feel some sympathy for Draco, let's not go so far > as to paint Draco as an innocent victim of Harry or a harsh no > nonsense teacher. > Betsy Hp: Who's painted Draco as an innocent victim? If you read my post I make a point of saying that Draco *isn't* an innocent victim here. Though let's not go to the other extreme and paint a sadistic, murderous Death Eater as a "no nonsense teacher" either. We do want to keep some sort of perspective after all. > >>bboyminn: > And from either perspective, Draco really doesn't have anyone to > blame but himself. If he had obeyed the rules and behaved himself, > he wouldn't have suffered any consequences. Betsy Hp: Probably *exactly* what Snape says about Harry. Though I'd also point out that if a sadistic, murderous Death Eater is out for a little vengence, good behavior probably won't save you. It didn't help Neville. Betsy Hp From gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk Wed Jan 11 22:43:36 2006 From: gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk (Geoff Bannister) Date: Wed, 11 Jan 2006 22:43:36 -0000 Subject: Humanity, Kant, Caricatures, and Draco (was Re: Real child abuse) In-Reply-To: <20060111165641.88327.qmail@web53105.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146270 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Magda Grantwich wrote: > MML: > > Put simply, Harry is > > fighting for the good, Malfoy is fighting for the evil (pure- > > blood wizardry) and it is this moral stance > > which renders their actions right or wrong. Magda: > Which would be fine if morality were like a big quidditch game with > teams clearly identifiable and no holds barred. But right and wrong > is a bit more complicated than that. You can do bad things and then > repent, and strive to do better or make up for your past. > > And Harry's showing himself a bit too quick to throw those > unforgiveables around for us (and him) to assume that his place on > Team Good Guys is assured and unassailable. > > And FWIW, "pureblood wizardry" isn't in and of itself evil. > > There's a verse in the bible (can't remember where) that says > something like there will be more rejoicing in heaven over one sinner > who repents than over ten others who never sinned at all. Something > for the good guys to remember lest they start to get smug. Geoff: For reference, the bit of 'canon' you need is: "I tell you that, in the same way, there will be more rejoicing over one sinner who repents than over ninety-nine righteous persons who do not need to repent" (Luke 15:7) Jesus is hammering home the point with the Pharisees that there is a need to repent; that those who /consider/ themselves righteous or who know all the answers will miss the chance to turn and go through the 'narrow door' of faith. I think there are a number of groups in the Wizarding World in adidtion to the good guys who are inclined to get smug. My top two candidates for this qualification of thinking that they have got it all sewn up are the Death Eaters and also the top echelon of the Ministry of Magic. I shall now await a comeback on that bit of iconoclastic thinking... From gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk Wed Jan 11 22:49:04 2006 From: gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk (Geoff Bannister) Date: Wed, 11 Jan 2006 22:49:04 -0000 Subject: Draco and Dentists In-Reply-To: <23251402.1137006881295.JavaMail.administrator@webmail> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146271 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, bawilson at c... wrote: > "Kelleyaynn: > That would be Drs. Granger. They are both dentists. Also, we've met > Uncle Vernon's sister." > BAW: > Correct me if I am wrong, but I was under the impression that in the UK only > MEDICAL doctors were called 'doctor.' Dentists, veterenarians, chiropractors, > etc. are all 'mister.' Geoff: You are quite right. The training for dentists and veterinary surgeons is not a degree that usually leads to a doctorate. Just as an aside, in UK medicine, "Mr." is almost a term of rank because it is only applied to a consultant or above. An 'ordinary' doctor is called just that. From h2so3f at yahoo.com Wed Jan 11 22:52:49 2006 From: h2so3f at yahoo.com (h2so3f) Date: Wed, 11 Jan 2006 22:52:49 -0000 Subject: Mrs. Figg (Was: Dursleys) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146272 orna wrote: Perhaps it's the other way round ? Perhaps Figgy is a wizard (it was suggested a hiding one ? polyjuiced). She is very strongly telling Harry she can't do any magic, so perhaps... she can, and quite a bit. After all, she must be a good poser to have been looking to Harry as an old lady infatuated with cats." CH3ed: I doubt that. If Figgy could do magic why didn't she help Harry when she saw that his first attempt at the patronus charm in the alley didn't work? And why didn't she help Harry carry Dudley home by magic to save time, or have to wait for Dung to get him to get the news to DD? Considering that Harry had just been attacked by dementors I don't think keeping a cover as a non-wizard was as important as getting Harry safe in his safe-house ASAP. Also JKR wrote on her site that neither Filch nor Figgs can perform magic. Orna wrote: When she tells Fudge this, he doesn't know anything about this ? he says they'll be checking it, but I doubt if they did. CH3ed: Considering how hostile Fudge was and how much he wanted to find faults with Harry and co, I think it is more likely that he did check and found Figgy to be the squib she said she is. Orna wrote: "I propose, she did see the dementors, but didn't know how to appear in the trial as a squib, just like wizards are very poor at understand muggles way of thinking. So she tried the best story she could think about ? I mean she doesn't know how dementors appear to squibs or muggles, so she tries to describe them as she has seen them in pictures. But when she saw it didn't work ? she told the feeling they aroused in her- this time sounding much more reliable." CH3ed: Actually, Figgy didn't see the dementors, but I believe she felt them... and she saw what Harry did to repel them. Her demeanor changed from when she was telling what dementors looked like (not confident) to when she told of how they affected her (very convincing and affected). JKR made it clear on her website about Figgy's inability to see the dementors. "Filch has carved himself a niche at Hogwarts and Arabella Figg operates as Dumbledore's liaison between the magical and Muggle worlds. Neither of these characters can perform magic (Filch's Kwikspell course never worked), but they still function within the wizarding world because they have access to certain magical objects and creatures that can help them (Arabella Figg does a roaring trade in cross-bred cats and Kneazles, and if you don`t know what a Kneazle is yet, shame on you). Incidentally, Arabella Figg never saw the Dementors that attacked Harry and Dudley, but she had enough magical knowledge to identify correctly the sensations they created in the alleyway." (http://www.jkrowling.com/textonly/en/extrastuff_view.cfm?id=19) :O) CH3ed is off to iron his hands and won't have any ice-cream tonight for submitting his 4th post of the day. Sorry, Alika Elf. :O) From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Wed Jan 11 22:53:25 2006 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Wed, 11 Jan 2006 22:53:25 -0000 Subject: Patterns in the six books Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146273 I've noticed some patterns in the six books relating to Snape, DADA, and minor villains (the series villain remains the same, of course) and I'm wondering if they mean anything. First, Snape is always in some way opposed to the DADA teacher, either thwarting or exposing him or her in some way (most obviously in SS/PS and PoA), as if he's some sort of agent, witting or unwitting, of the DADA curse. In HBP, this aspect of Snape's role in the books reaches its epitome and he in essence engineers his own downfall via the DADA curse. We're told (JKR in a recent interview) that there *will* be a DADA teacher and it won't be Snape (not that anyone expected that it would be). Has Snape, by inflicting the curse on himself and by destroying Dumbledore (whom LV was presumably punishing by cursing the position in the first place) brought the curse to an end? Also, although the primary villain is always Voldemort, whether he plays an active role in a particular book or not, there's always a sub-villain (usually not the person we thought it was). In SS/PS, it's Quirrell (not Snape); in CoS, it's Diary!Tom (acting through Ginny), not Draco, though it could be argued that Diary!Tom is just Voldemort in another form and the surprise sub-villain is Lucius Malfoy (who put the diary in Ginny's cauldron); in PoA, it's Peter Pettigrew, not Sirius Black; in GoF, it's Crouch!Moody, not one of a whole crowd of other suspects (including Crouch Sr. and Karkaroff). In OoP, the pattern changes; we know that the sub-villain is Umbridge almost from the time we first meet her, and unlike Quirrell, Diary!Tom (or Lucius Malfoy), Wormtail, and Barty Crouch Jr., she's not an agent (or aspect) of Voldemort. And in HBP, it changes again. The people Harry suspects, Draco and Snape (falsely suspected in Books 1 and 2) seem to be what Harry thinks they are, bringing the pattern full circle. What will happen to the pattern in Book 7? Will Snape and Draco continue to be the sub-villains, only to be found--not innocent, exactly, but something other than villains in the end? Will Harry realize, at he started to do in GoF when he thought about Barty Jr. supposedly dying in Azkaban, that it all comes down to Voldemort and that Voldemort has ruined Snape's life, and maybe Draco's, too? Carol, wondering how it all fits together and whether there's any significance to these patterns From iam.kemper at gmail.com Wed Jan 11 23:05:38 2006 From: iam.kemper at gmail.com (Kemper) Date: Wed, 11 Jan 2006 15:05:38 -0800 Subject: Enemy of my enemy... Message-ID: <700201d40601111505o74a9007axe5e490eb7dcba0b3@mail.gmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 146274 Nora in another thread: Speaking of something which made me think, I got the impression that the "enemy of my enemy is my friend" proposition was solidly rejected at the end of the book, with Harry refusing to ally or explain anything to Scrimgeour. The resources of the Ministry would be useful, wouldn't they? Lesser of two evils, making an alliance there? But it was rejected out of hand. Is this a moral issue, or is it more plot-driven with the Trio going it alone? . .. ... Kemper now: I don't get the impression that the Ministry has been anything but an enemy to Harry/the Order. The MinistryOfMagic-Enemy looks different from the DarkOrder-Enemy... kind of like the Japanese looking different from the Axis, only different. - It's as though there are two fronts. Both enemy's seem to corrupt power, but one is more palatable than the other. MoM-Enemy treatment of Harry, Stan, Hagrid, House Elves, Squibs, Muggles, Half-Beings ...versus... DO-Enemy treatment of Everyone Missing/Dead, some patients at St Mungo's, House Elves, Squibs, Muggles and Muggle born. - I'm sure others can make an alliance okay, but at what cost? Where is the moral-line drawn? Kemper [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From harold.flashman at gmail.com Wed Jan 11 23:26:03 2006 From: harold.flashman at gmail.com (Harry Flashman) Date: Wed, 11 Jan 2006 23:26:03 -0000 Subject: Wandless Harry and his powers Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146275 Just finished re-reading Order of the Phoenix and realised that there is a scene when harry is looking for his wand while fighting the dementors and out of desperation says "lumos" and the wand starts to give off light even though Harry is not holding it. I wonder if that means that Harry has special powers to control wands and make magic even from a distance? No further mention is made of this, and certainly Harry does not dwell on it or think it to be unusual at all. Also, JKR is really stretching the bounds of credulity by making Harry appear to be a very ordinary wizard (even incapable of doing non-verbal spells, and useless at occlumency and leglimency), yet one who is supposed to have been marked as an equal by Voldemort. It does not add up, at the very least Harry should have some extra-ordinary skills that would make him stand out when compared to his peers. Yes ability to talk to snakes is in him, but he has no special skills when it comes to combating dark magic or even for that matter successfully overcoming the defenses of other dark wizards, so how is he supposed to fight the most powerful dark wizard of all? Maybe Harry will love Voldemort into death? Wouldnt that be great? I think Harry would have to show a lot more power (even with his ability to love) to finally take on and best Voldemort. But this does not appear to be very likely as JKR seems determined to keep Harry as an average wizard at best. Harry From littleleah at handbag.com Wed Jan 11 23:40:19 2006 From: littleleah at handbag.com (littleleahstill) Date: Wed, 11 Jan 2006 23:40:19 -0000 Subject: Patterns in the six books In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146276 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "justcarol67" wrote: > > I've noticed some patterns in the six books relating to Snape, DADA, > and minor villains (the series villain remains the same, of course) > and I'm wondering if they mean anything. > > (snipped) > Also, although the primary villain is always Voldemort, whether he > plays an active role in a particular book or not, there's always a > sub-villain (usually not the person we thought it was). In SS/PS, it's > Quirrell (not Snape); in CoS, it's Diary!Tom (acting through Ginny), > not Draco, though it could be argued that Diary!Tom is just Voldemort > in another form and the surprise sub-villain is Lucius Malfoy (who put > the diary in Ginny's cauldron); in PoA, it's Peter Pettigrew, not > Sirius Black; in GoF, it's Crouch!Moody, not one of a whole crowd of > other suspects (including Crouch Sr. and Karkaroff). In OoP, the > pattern changes; we know that the sub-villain is Umbridge almost from > the time we first meet her, and unlike Quirrell, Diary!Tom (or Lucius > Malfoy), Wormtail, and Barty Crouch Jr., she's not an agent (or > aspect) of Voldemort. And in HBP, it changes again. The people Harry > suspects, Draco and Snape (falsely suspected in Books 1 and 2) seem to > be what Harry thinks they are, bringing the pattern full circle. What > will happen to the pattern in Book 7? Will Snape and Draco continue to > be the sub-villains, only to be found--not innocent, exactly, but > something other than villains in the end? Will Harry realize, at he > started to do in GoF when he thought about Barty Jr. supposedly dying > in Azkaban, that it all comes down to Voldemort and that Voldemort has > ruined Snape's life, and maybe Draco's, too? > > Carol, wondering how it all fits together and whether there's any > significance to these patterns Leah I've snipped the first part of this post (on Snape) because although I thought it was very interesting, I've nothing to add. However, I wonder whether the true villain in OOTP could be Kreacher. A lot of Harry's time in this book is spent trying to hide Sirius from Umbridge, whereas it is Kreacher who is hidden in plain sight all along who ultimately engineers Sirius' downfall. Leah From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Wed Jan 11 23:44:52 2006 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Wed, 11 Jan 2006 23:44:52 -0000 Subject: Humanity, Kant, Caricatures, and Draco - Perspective In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146277 Betsy Hp wrote: > I agree, Draco was asking for it. And if Harry and Ron had jumped him at this point, or if he'd lost tons of house points from Slytherin and earned a detention to boot he'd have only himself to> blame. But it was beyond weird for Fake!Moody to get involved in the manner he did. Of course, we learn later that Fake!Moody (who loves to attack from behind) was just looking for an excuse. Carol responds: Exactly. "Moody" roars,"OH NO YOU DON'T, LADDIE!" and Harry spins around to see "Moody" pointing his wand at a white ferret and bouncing it. As I read the scene, Draco is probably facing the same way as Harry, who's leaving, so Draco's back is probably turned when "Moody" attacks him, just as Harry's back was turned to Draco. (Harry's POV makes it impossible to determine this with any certainty.) Yet he calls Draco a coward for attacking when his opponent's back is turned (highly hypocritical when we see what Fake!Moody does later in the books). But even if Draco's back isn't turned when "Moody" attacks him, he certainly could not have anticipated being attacked by a teacher (no other teacher has used a spell to punish a student at this point in the books) and "Moody," as a teacher and a supposed ex-Auror has a distinct advantage over Draco, who can't fight back even after he's restored to his normal form. If he dared to try (which he wouldn't, being a coward and knowing his duelling skills to be inferior to "Moody"'s, he'd be expelled. So however much Draco deserved detention in this scene, he didn't deserve the punishment he received. This scene, for me, immediately threw Mad-Eye's integrity or sanity or ethics into doubt, long before I suspected that he was an imposter (certainly not Barty Jr., whom we hadn't learned about yet). Draco may be a DE-lover and a Voldie follower, and "Moody" may have a vendetta against Draco's DE father, but he's revealing a moral or spiritual kinship to the DEs in this scene, as he does again when he Imperios his own students and Crucios the spider in front of Neville. Crouch!Moody is a bad guy, evil through and through. He hates Draco not because Draco's father was a DE but because he denied that he was ever loyal to Voldemort. He hates Snape because Dumbledore got Snape off the hook and he suspects that Snape in return is loyal to Dumbledore. (How else could Voldie have suspected that Snape had left him forever unless Crouch!Moody informed him of Snape's loyalties?) He has helped to Crucio the Longbottoms into insanity; kidnapped and Imperio'd the real Moody; Imperio'd his own father, whom he later murders; he later Imperios Krum to force him to Crucio Cedric; he thas transformed the TriWizard Cup into a portkey so that Wormtail can kidnap Harry, use his blood to resurrect Voldemort, and Voldie can kill Harry. The whole idea of this incident, which may make the unsuspecting reader laugh when he first reads it, is to foreshadow the evil nature of this character. He punishes Draco for breaking the rules of fair play by breaking them himself, not to mention breaking the rule against using Transfiguration as a punishment. Whether Draco deserves punishment or not is beside the point. "Moody" should not have punished him in *that* way, even with fair warning (as in, "If you do that again, I'll turn you into a ferret and bounce you sky high." The scene shows Draco, the cowardly future DE, and Crouch!Moody, the loyal DE disguised as a paranoid Auror, as kindred spirits, with Crouch!Moody at this point by far the more evil of the two. This is, of course, just my opinion and I expect others to disagree violently. But just as Umbridge's punishment of Harry by having him write lines in his own blood would be unjustified even if he were really lying as Umbridge claims and perhaps believes, Crouch!Moody's punishment of Draco is unjustified regardless of his infraction. He should have lost points for Slytherin and received a warning that he'd get detention if he did it again. That's how things are done at Hogwarts under Dumbledore. McGonagall is right to reprimand "Moody" and "Moody" is wholly unjustified in breaking the rules in this instance. I'm betting that the real Mad-eye, who never killed if he could bring a DE in alive, would not have used Transfiguration on a helpless student, even if that student had set fire to Hogwarts. Carol From harold.flashman at gmail.com Wed Jan 11 23:40:10 2006 From: harold.flashman at gmail.com (Harry Flashman) Date: Wed, 11 Jan 2006 23:40:10 -0000 Subject: Half blood prince disappointing Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146278 What a disappointing book! I think JKR spent to many pages on unneeded details. I mean did we need page after page watching how harry convinced Slughorn to come back to Hogwarts? Could not dumbledore simply have introduced Slughorn and then later told harry that the reason he (DD) suspects that slughorn took the job was so that he could add harry to his club? Often I got the impression that JKR was simply trying to fill pages. So much more plot could have been developed and loose ends started to be tied. I can't see how the final book in the series can be any less than a 1000 pages with all the loose ends that need to be tied in order to properly close the plots and bring the series to a satisfactory end. Harry's training with DD could have been more than just learning about Voldemorts horcruxes. In the cave DD tells harry that magic always leaves traces yet does not tell harry how to spot such traces, even though it is expected that harry will go in search of other horcruxes. DD does not impart any special wisdom/knowledge that Harry will need to overcome the immensely powerful defenses that Voldemort has put around his horcruxes, or help harry form relationships with other intelligent magical creatures who clearly respect DD and whose help Harry might need. Almost as if DD simply left harry to fend for himself, and unless DD is not really dead and will return in the next book to lead harry to the remaining horcruxes and train him to successfully fight (and kill) Voldemort, Harry will have a learn a lot himself and awfully fast. One other thing that occurred to me is that while Harry has survived Voldemort on several occasions, surviving and killing are 2 very different things. Harry needs to kill Voldemort but clearly does not have the skill (at least at the end of HBP) to do so. Here is a way in which Harry might kill Voldemort: The 2 meet face to face and after a brief duel, Voldemort disarms Harry and tries to take over his mind, but because Harry's mind is so full of love despite the loss of so many people he loves (and who loved him) Voldemort cannot take the experience and is expelled from harry's mind in a greatly weakened form, and Harry is able to either kill, or disable Voldemort before he recovers his strength. Of course all this will happen after all the Horcruxes have been tracked down and destroyed. Anyway the next book will have to have a lot more action, and plot development than HBP had. Harry From luckdragon64 at yahoo.ca Thu Jan 12 00:01:31 2006 From: luckdragon64 at yahoo.ca (Luckdragon) Date: Thu, 12 Jan 2006 00:01:31 -0000 Subject: LV's philosophy Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146279 Luckdragon: Exactly what is LV's philosophy? In the first book I was under the impression that he wanted to wipe out anyone or anything that was not a pure blood witch/wizard despite the fact that he himself is not a pureblood. Next we find out that he is controlling/working somewhat symbiotically with the dementors who are neither human or magical beings. We also find out that at least one of his deatheaters is a half- blood; and that he is also courting giants, werewolves, etc. to join him in his quest. Lastly LV has damaged his soul so much that he no longer even resembles a human being. So how is it that all of his followers and affiliates do not realize that LV is out for himself alone and really has none of their interests at heart. How is it that they blindly follow someone who goes against his own philosophy by accepting these other creatures into his fold. Why do the pureblood community, who have wizarding geneology at their fingertips, not know that LV himself is not a pureblood and accept that a halfblood(Snape) is seemingly high up in LV's band. What will it take for everyone to realize that the philosophy touted by LV is a load of bunk? From luckdragon64 at yahoo.ca Thu Jan 12 00:32:54 2006 From: luckdragon64 at yahoo.ca (Bee Chase) Date: Wed, 11 Jan 2006 19:32:54 -0500 (EST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Half blood prince disappointing In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20060112003254.64618.qmail@web53302.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 146280 Harry Flashman wrote: What a disappointing book! I think JKR spent to many pages on unneeded details. I mean did we need page after page watching how harry convinced Slughorn to come back to Hogwarts? Could not dumbledore simply have introduced Slughorn and then later told harry that the reason he (DD) suspects that slughorn took the job was so that he could add harry to his club? Often I got the impression that JKR was simply trying to fill pages. So much more plot could have been developed and loose ends started to be tied. I can't see how the final book in the series can be any less than a 1000 pages with all the loose ends that need to be tied in order to properly close the plots and bring the series to a satisfactory end. Harry's training with DD could have been more than just learning about Voldemorts horcruxes. In the cave DD tells harry that magic always leaves traces yet does not tell harry how to spot such traces, even though it is expected that harry will go in search of other horcruxes. DD does not impart any special wisdom/knowledge that Harry will need to overcome the immensely powerful defenses that Voldemort has put around his horcruxes, or help harry form relationships with other intelligent magical creatures who clearly respect DD and whose help Harry might need. Almost as if DD simply left harry to fend for himself, and unless DD is not really dead and will return in the next book to lead harry to the remaining horcruxes and train him to successfully fight (and kill) Voldemort, Harry will have a learn a lot himself and awfully fast. One other thing that occurred to me is that while Harry has survived Voldemort on several occasions, surviving and killing are 2 very different things. Harry needs to kill Voldemort but clearly does not have the skill (at least at the end of HBP) to do so. Here is a way in which Harry might kill Voldemort: The 2 meet face to face and after a brief duel, Voldemort disarms Harry and tries to take over his mind, but because Harry's mind is so full of love despite the loss of so many people he loves (and who loved him) Voldemort cannot take the experience and is expelled from harry's mind in a greatly weakened form, and Harry is able to either kill, or disable Voldemort before he recovers his strength. Of course all this will happen after all the Horcruxes have been tracked down and destroyed. Anyway the next book will have to have a lot more action, and plot development than HBP had. Luckdragon: I did not snip as I wanted to address the lot. Firstly as an avid HP fan the more details the better as far as I'm concerned and I think Harry's interaction with Slughorn was very important in showing how Harry is able to win over possibly important allies who may aid him in his quest. Harry does not have to threaten, lie, or cajole people to do things; it is his honestly and simplicity, and connection to his parents and the premature death they endured for him that makes good people do the right thing. As for DD having made poor use of his sessions with Harry, I do not think Harry's magical ability will play as much of a role in defeating LV as people may think. Yes he will require a good amount of defensive ability, but I believe his friends, supporters, and willingness to sacrifice will be of much more importance. Whenever Harry has had to battle LV it was not so much his magical ability that got him through as his friends, his loyalty, his faith, and his determination. As for Killing LV, I do not believe Harry will have to commit murder. The prophecy said "Vanquish", not kill. There is a possibility Harry with the help of his supporters will find a way to destroy LV without killing him. LV wants power; a person is only as powerful as his supporters make him. If LV's supporters were to abandon him and everyone turned against him, then he could be defeated. Also as LV has willingly given up pieces of his soul and those pieces are destroyed is it really murder? --------------------------------- Find your next car at Yahoo! Canada Autos [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From kking0731 at gmail.com Thu Jan 12 01:41:51 2006 From: kking0731 at gmail.com (Kathy King) Date: Wed, 11 Jan 2006 20:41:51 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Half blood prince disappointing In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146281 Harry snipped: What a disappointing book! I think JKR spent to many pages on unneeded details. I mean did we need page after page watching how harry convinced Slughorn to come back to Hogwarts? Could not dumbledore simply have introduced Slughorn and then later told harry that the reason he (DD) suspects that slughorn took the job was so that he could add harry to his club? Often I got the impression that JKR was simply trying to fill pages. Snow: I can relate but did you honestly think she would?or better yet could give us too much? Every aspect of every book has been gone over with a fine-tooth comb by doctors, lawyers and Indian chiefs, so how much could JKR give away in this book that wouldn't have allowed for us to beat her to the punch? I, not unlike you, was a bit disappointed at first read-through because I didn't see anything on the surface (blazing me in the face) as far as answers I had expected. But when I viewed all of my expectations, I realized that the bigger answer is a tangled web of information. If she allowed one obvious answer, at least to my expected queries, then there could be a fair possibility of figuring out the rest because it's so intertwined. I think we need to work at the puzzle backwards to go forewords. What information did she leave out that we expected to be answered?i.e. the two-way mirrors, Etc, etc, etc. Remember that everything important that was left unanswered in HBP is intertwined so that giving away one portion of that information would have led to another revelation thus there were many unanswered queries. All I may suggest to you would be to look deeper into HBP to find the significance in what may have appeared to be mundane at first?I know that I am. Snow [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From tonks_op at yahoo.com Thu Jan 12 02:13:43 2006 From: tonks_op at yahoo.com (Tonks) Date: Thu, 12 Jan 2006 02:13:43 -0000 Subject: Harry will not kill (was Half blood prince disappointing) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146282 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Harry Flashman" wrote: > Harry Flashman wrote: One other thing that occurred to me is that while Harry has survived Voldemort on several occasions, surviving and killing are 2 very different things. Harry needs to kill Voldemort but clearly does not have the skill (at least at the end of HBP) to do so. Tonks: Harry Potter will not kill. I am sure that JKR is not writing a book for children (or even for adults) in which the hero kills. Harry will not even kill in self defense. Here is the proof: First of all, DD is Harry's role model and DD has never killed. I do not think for one moment that DD weak and without a wand could not have killed everyone there on the tower that night if he had wanted to do so. DD chose not to kill. He chose to die instead. There may be other reasons as well why he chose to die, but one of them was that He will not kill. DD defeated Grindelwald, but we are not told that he killed him. DD has said that there are many ways to destroy a man. DD knows that to kill fractures the soul. As a wise man he knew that "there are worse things than death". In all of this he has taught Harry well, by word and by example. Harry does not have it in him to kill. Yes, he has been angry and tried to do some of the unforgivable curses. But remember what Bella said. You have to really mean it from the core of your being, and Harry doesn't'. Harry is full of Love, with all that Love means. Love does not kill. Love suffers, Love forgives, Love endures, but Love does not kill. Snape "No unforgivable curses from you, Harry Potter!" Snape also said that Harry is only a mediocre wizard and gets by with luck and help from his friends. A lot like the rest of us. JKR has said that the books are very moral. I think that she has set Harry up to be a role model for children. Harry is our role model too. He shows us how to go on Loving no matter what. He screws up sometime, but carries on with a lot of luck and the help of his friends. And in the end if he survives it will be with luck and the help of his friends. If he dies, it will be his sacrifice of Love. Tonks_op From ceridwennight at hotmail.com Thu Jan 12 02:31:42 2006 From: ceridwennight at hotmail.com (Ceridwen) Date: Thu, 12 Jan 2006 02:31:42 -0000 Subject: Mrs. Figg (Was: Dursleys) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146283 bboyminn: > Still, even the timing of an attack on the Dursleys doesn't quite seem > right. Harry has a lot of plans for the summer, and I can't see him > hanging around the Dursley for four whole weeks. I say two at best. > Then he is off to Gordic's Hollow, back for the Weasley wedding, then > off to his life, the Horcrux hunt, and the final battle with > Voldemort. For there to be an attack on the Dursleys, Harry needs an > excuse to return to the Dursleys after he has left and after he turns > 17; I really can't come up with a good excuse for this return, and I > can't come up with any likelihood of a DE attack before Harry turns 17. Ceridwen: Making a suggestion - I don't recall canon for when the Weasley/Delacour wedding will be. And I'm feeling too lazy (just started school today) to look it up. But I'm *reasonably* certain a date wasn't mentioned. If the wedding takes place early in July, Harry would attend that first, then go to the Dursleys for the last of his protection. Which may coincide with his birthday. Objectively, I wouldn't hold a wedding so soon after the funeral of a dear friend. But odder emotional events have happened in the books. And a joyful event like a wedding following on the heels of a sad event like a funeral might affirm hope for the future. And since Bill was injured in the attack, it could be a personal affirmation for both him and Fleur. Also, they may decide to get it done and over with quickly to free everyone up for the coming battle(s). Ceridwen. From bartl at sprynet.com Thu Jan 12 02:42:54 2006 From: bartl at sprynet.com (Bart Lidofsky) Date: Wed, 11 Jan 2006 21:42:54 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Mrs. Figg (Was: Dursleys) In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <43C5C22E.60507@sprynet.com> No: HPFGUIDX 146284 potioncat wrote: >>>Bart: >>> Let's list all the non-magical people we have met: >>> >>> 1) Filch >>> 2) Mrs. Figg >>> 3) The Dursleys >>> 4) Dr. & Mrs. Granger >>> 5) Ummmm.... uh..... hmmmmm..... >>> >> >>Finwitch: >> >>5) Masons (Dinner guests at Dursleys in CoS) >>6) Piers Poldiss&others of Draco's gang >>7) Mark Evans(&Parents?) >>8) the Railroad-staff member Harry asked about the Hogwarts Train > > (who > >>quite obviously had no idea...) >>9) The someone who asked what's going on when Harry crashed the >>trolley (CoS) >>10) The poor Muggles in QWC being oblivated by Ministry and lifted >>into air by DEs. >>11) The postman wondering about the stamps >>12) The Muggles met during Vernon's attempt to avoid the post for > > Harry. > >>Also - 7 of them saw Flying Car, and some Muggle saw Sirius far off >>Hogwarts... Bart: I said "who we have met". Many of those we know only be reference. From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Thu Jan 12 02:59:09 2006 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Thu, 12 Jan 2006 02:59:09 -0000 Subject: Nagini as Horcrux In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146285 Deb wrote: > > Ahhh yes but IF the boa had been Nagini then would the snake have owed Harry a life debt for setting it free from the zoo? Or if not a life debt, then just have felt less inclined to harm Harry because it was grateful to him? > Kelleyaynn replied: > > Good point. Perhaps that is why Wormtail now owes Harry a life debt. Maybe that life debt was intended for Nagini first, but since the original snake was a boa, that couldn't work out and JKR switched it to Pettigrew. Carol responds to both: As I understand it, a life debt is owed by one wizard to another, not by a creature to a wizard. We've heard nothing about Buckbeak owing Harry a life debt, and Harry saved his life in PoA. (He does attack Snape in HBP, but he doesn't save Harry's life, which is not in danger, at least not from Snape, who has ordered the DEs to leave the grounds). I suspect that the boa constrictor could not owe anyone a life debt, even if a creature can owe one, as he's probably not magical, and in any case, Harry didn't save his life; he merely set him free (purely by accident). I also don't think the boa constrictor was intended to resemble Nagini, who is clearly evil, circling around Harry in the graveyard because Voldemort has promised her Harry as a meal. (In GoF, "The Dream," Voldemort consoles her for the loss of Wormtail, whose mistake in letting Barty Sr. escape has been rectified by the murderous Barty Jr., by promising her Harry.) Odd behavior for a creature who owes Harry a life debt or any kind of debt. Nagini (if I can ever find the reference!) is a venomous green; the boa constrictor has "glistening brown coils" (SS/PS Am. ed. 27). And the narrator refers to it as a "he"; Nagini is a "she," an important point since (as I said in another post," she is symbolically a "mother" to Voldemort in his fetal form, providing the venom for the potion that created him (note that Baby!mort, among his other revolting traits, has a snakelike face and scaly skin) and her "milk" (the venom again) sustains him in this form. (It appears to be Baby!mort's only food.) Harry has a friendly conversation with the boa constrictor in SS/PS (although it doesn't actually speak to him). I expect he'll converse with Nagini in Parseltongue at some point, with both of them speaking, but he'll regard her as an enemy and she'll see him as her intended prey. (That Nagini can speak to and be understood by a Parselmouth is revealed when she tells LV that there's an old Muggle on the stairs in GoF chapter 1--interesting that a snake would know a Muggle from a wizard.) I don't think JKR ever intended for the snake, which is primarily a plot device to show Harry's ability to talk to snakes (and to perform accidental magic), to be Nagini, whose relationship to Harry has to be antagonistic. She is Voldemort's familiar and, as DD points, has a very strong affinity with him that suggests she may be a Horcrux. As I said earlier, her life force doesn't seem to have been lessened by Voldemort's possessing her in OoP, and Harry (seeing from the snake's POV in his vision) thinks her thoughts as well as Voldemort's. The thoughts have merged into a single entity--Nagini doesn't distinguish betwwen her own desires and Voldemort's--but she still senses a conflict between her desire to bite and her actual mission, which relates to the Prophecy orb in the Department of Mysteries. (I'm sure this dual nature is what DD is referring to as "in essence divided"--one body, two natures or selves.) Nagini obeys Voldemort as the Basilisk obeyed Tom Riddle, the Heir of its original master, Salazar Slytherin, and it may be that nothing more is involved in the affinity between them than LV's inherited ability to speak Parseltongue, but I agree with Dumbledore that there's more to it. We know that Voldemort's appearance, both in fetal form and in adult form, is snakelike, which again suggests the possibility that she's a Horcrux. Not only does she share his nature, with a soul bit inside her, but he shares hers, as indicated by the scaly skin (in fetal form), the flat face, and the slits for nostrils. Making the earlier Horcruxes blurred Voldemort's features and made him less human, but there's no indication in the Pensieve memory of the DADA interview that he was already snakelike. Something happened after that to create an extreme change in his appearance--the disappearance of his nose in particular. Did he test his immortality by drinking some of her venom? Would that alone be sufficient to explain his altered appearance, so changed (according to DD) that very few people knew who he was when he returned to England to recruit followers? There is some question, apparently, as to whether he was actually snakelike at that time (ca. 197), but unless he already had his present-day appearance (in a body identical to the one he has now), it's unlikely that the Death Eaters would have been able to suppress a gasp of horror when they saw him in the graveyard. Also, when we see only his face sticking out of Quirrell's head in SS/PS, it is already "chalk white with glaring red eyes and slits for nostrils, like a snake" (Am. ed. 293). That description suggests to me that he was equally snakelike before Godric's Hollow. If so, the explanation would seem to be that Nagini was already a Horcrux, the last to be made, and that choosing her as his soulmate, so to speak, he took on aspects of her appearance, indicating that his lost humanness (not humanity, which he never had) was replaced by snakelike cunning and (figurative) venom. It's possible, of course, that he made her into a Horcrux at some point *after* Godric's Hollow, but as he couldn't use a wand until Pettigrew made his fetal body, and he was already not able to drink but dependent on her venom for sustenance at that time, it seems likely that he made her into a Horcrux before he was turned into vapor at Godric's Hollow. Setting aside alternative suggestions for the sixth Horcrux(including Harry the Horcrux, which belongs in some other thread), can anyone offer any other explanation for the nearly symbiotic lives of Nagini and Voldemort and for Voldemort's snakelike features, or a way that Nagini could have been made a Horcrux *after* Godric's Hollow rather than before it? LV certainly wouldn't have trusted either Quirrell or Pettigrew to perform the Horcrux spell for him, even if they could (I doubt that anyone except the murderer can remove and encase the soul piece). (As I said before, I don't believe in accidental Horcruxes, nor is there any evidence that Nagini was present at Godric's Hollow even if accidental Horcruxes can be created.) So is she a Horcrux, and, if so, when did she become one? If she isn't a Horcrux in your view, why not? And how can we explain all the affinities between Nagini and LV, including his dependence on her venom when he's in fetal form, if she's only his familiar? Carol, trusting Dumbledore on this one but still wanting to hear what other posters think From maria8162001 at yahoo.com Wed Jan 11 12:09:19 2006 From: maria8162001 at yahoo.com (Maria Vaerewijck) Date: Wed, 11 Jan 2006 04:09:19 -0800 (PST) Subject: Mrs. Figg (Was: Dursleys) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20060111120919.80920.qmail@web53203.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 146286 maria8162001: Hi, I know it's farfetched, but would it be possible that maybe Mrs. Figg, aside from being Harry's neighbor and somebody that DD put there to keep an eye on Harry the whole time, is somebody that DD need to hide also from the DE and Voldy, so DD gave her another identity? We all know that DD trusts Snape so much, what if Mrs. Figg is somebody related to Snape, maybe his mother or wife or girlfriend? Just a thought. Bart: > Let's list all the non-magical people we have met: > > 1) Filch > 2) Mrs. Figg > 3) The Dursleys > 4) Dr. & Mrs. Granger > 5) Ummmm.... uh..... hmmmmm..... Finwitch: > 5) Masons (Dinner guests at Dursleys in CoS) > 6) Piers Poldiss&others of Draco's gang > 7) Mark Evans(&Parents?) > 8) the Railroad-staff member Harry asked about the Hogwarts Train > (who quite obviously had no idea...) > 9) The someone who asked what's going on when Harry crashed the > trolley (CoS) > 10) The poor Muggles in QWC being oblivated by Ministry and lifted > into air by DEs. > 11) The postman wondering about the stamps > 12) The Muggles met during Vernon's attempt to avoid the post for > Harry. > > Also - 7 of them saw Flying Car, and some Muggle saw Sirius far > off Hogwarts... maria8162001: Let's not forget about the Muggle prime Minister in HBP maria8162001 From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Thu Jan 12 03:35:57 2006 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Thu, 12 Jan 2006 03:35:57 -0000 Subject: Knowledge about Lily and James In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146287 Brothergib: > At the end of book 2, when Harry confronts Lucius Malfoy, he makes the > comment that Harry's parents were 'meddlesome fools as well'. Is this > just a reference to their belonging to the Order of the Pheonix and > obviously being involved in the fight against Voldemort, or does it > refer to some specific act that the Potters had perpetrated? Who knows? Alla: Who knows indeed, but I would like to speculate that dear Lucius indeed referred to some specific acts which Lily and James did. If they meddled in the matters dear Lucius thinks they should not have, it is obviously connected to the fight against Voldemort IMO, BUT I wonder whether it was said in relation to their spying activities (MAHAHA - imagine Lily and James spying with Snape), which is basically impossible I guess since they were couple of the Prophecy and had to hide since then, but again who knows maybe they did some short term spying before Harry was born. Hmmm, pure speculation here no proof of course. Oh, maybe Lucius was indeed calling them "meddlesome" because of their research activities - like Lily's much debated supposed work in the Love Room or Veil room. The funny thing is that Lucius called them BOTH medlesome fools,so that is something they did together, right? For some reason I don't see James as a researcher. Again, just speculating. Alla From thubanofllanmoel at yahoo.co.uk Wed Jan 11 13:14:00 2006 From: thubanofllanmoel at yahoo.co.uk (simon harris) Date: Wed, 11 Jan 2006 13:14:00 +0000 (GMT) Subject: Mrs. Figg (Was: Dursleys) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20060111131400.28705.qmail@web25812.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 146288 Deb (djklaugh): "Or are all the OOP equiped with some type of spell that lets them hear cries for help?" Si: I do not think so as no one knew of Arthur's attack until Harry told everyone. From erikog at one.net Thu Jan 12 04:33:37 2006 From: erikog at one.net (krista7) Date: Thu, 12 Jan 2006 04:33:37 -0000 Subject: magic late in life In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146289 Carol writes: > Filch, I agree, is a better candidate, being a Squib and constantly > in the presence of magic. And he certainly *wants* to learn magic, as > evidenced by the Qwikspell course. But he's also unpredictable and > his ethics are questionable.... I'm *hoping* it is Filch, because it shows that this guy-- generally regarded as a somewhat creepy loser by his colleagues and the student body--triumphed over his "educational delay" (shall we say) by virtue of persistence, hope, and consistent studiousness. As for what might cause Filch's "blossoming": Filch, in his own bizarre, extremely disturbing way, knows love. He wasn't around in "Chamber" to defend Mrs. Norris at the time of her petrification, but I don't doubt he'd have tried! Put Mrs. Norris in danger in front of Filch, and that might trigger an "awakening," I think. Krista From sherriola at earthlink.net Thu Jan 12 04:48:25 2006 From: sherriola at earthlink.net (Sherry Gomes) Date: Wed, 11 Jan 2006 20:48:25 -0800 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: magic late in life In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <004e01c61733$6d6b5740$0400a8c0@pensive> No: HPFGUIDX 146290 Krista I'm *hoping* it is Filch, because it shows that this guy-- generally regarded as a somewhat creepy loser by his colleagues and the student body--triumphed over his "educational delay" (shall we say) by virtue of persistence, hope, and consistent studiousness. Krista Sherry now: I'd like to see Mrs. Figg be the one to do magic late in life. Definitely not Filch. if anyone deserves to develop magical ability, it's Mrs. Figg. she is loyal and tough and a bit goofy. Filch is mean and longs for the days when he could have tortured students. I'd really hate to see such a mean spirited, hateful person get his wish. Who knows what he'd do if he suddenly could do magic? I can see a situation in which Mrs. Figg would be trying to defend someone, probably Harry, and she could perform magic out of desperation, and maybe even because she is defending someone else. I vote for Figgy! Sherry From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Thu Jan 12 04:50:57 2006 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Thu, 12 Jan 2006 04:50:57 -0000 Subject: Mentioning of the future characters in the previous books WAS: Chapter 1 POA/ In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146291 Brotherjib: > Having just started reading POA to my six year old son, I was surprised > to find further reference to Bill Weasley's role as a curse breaker. > Not only that, but Bill was apparently working on some paricularly > complex and nasty curses set by the ancient Egyptians. > > This led me; > 1). To increase my confidence of the importance of Bill's role in > destroying Horcruxes in book 7 > 2). To further marvel at JKR and the clues she manages to leave > throughout her books. Alla: I would certainly agree with you that JKR managed to mention A LOT of characters we learn about in the future in the earlier books. I am rereading PS/SS now and while of course we all know and remember how nicely Mrs. Figg and Sirius are mentioned in passing, I absolutely did not remember that JKR managed to stick Molly's brothers in there too. "No one ever lived after he decided ter kill 'em, no one except you, an'he'd killed some o' the best witches an' wizards of the age - the McKinnons, the Bones, the Prewetts - an' you was only a baby, an' you lived." - PS/SS, p.56 Alla From katmac at katmac.cncdsl.com Thu Jan 12 06:30:23 2006 From: katmac at katmac.cncdsl.com (lagattalucianese) Date: Thu, 12 Jan 2006 06:30:23 -0000 Subject: Patterns in the six books In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146292 > ... > ...In OoP, the > pattern changes; we know that the sub-villain is Umbridge almost > from the time we first meet her, and unlike Quirrell, Diary!Tom (or > Lucius Malfoy), Wormtail, and Barty Crouch Jr., she's not an agent > (or aspect) of Voldemort. > ... > > Carol, wondering how it all fits together and whether there's any > significance to these patterns > La Gatta Lucianese: I wouldn't be too sure. I'm rereading OotP, and there's a weird little incident in Chapter 13, when Umbridge touches Harry's arm to see if his punishment is making the right "impression", and Harry feels his scar "sear". Later, Harry tries to convince Ron and Hermione that it was just a coincidence, but we know better, don't we? I will be very surprised if someone as nasty as Umbridge doesn't turn out to be a Voldemort agent inside the Ministry. From katmac at katmac.cncdsl.com Thu Jan 12 06:38:17 2006 From: katmac at katmac.cncdsl.com (lagattalucianese) Date: Thu, 12 Jan 2006 06:38:17 -0000 Subject: Wandless Harry and his powers In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146293 > ... > > Also, JKR is really stretching the bounds of credulity by making Harry > appear to be a very ordinary wizard (even incapable of doing > non-verbal spells, and useless at occlumency and leglimency), yet one > who is supposed to have been marked as an equal by Voldemort. It does > not add up, at the very least Harry should have some extra-ordinary > skills that would make him stand out when compared to his peers. Yes > ability to talk to snakes is in him, but he has no special skills when > it comes to combating dark magic or even for that matter successfully > overcoming the defenses of other dark wizards, so how is he supposed > to fight the most powerful dark wizard of all? > ... > > Harry > La Gatta Lucianese: If you have just finished reading OotP, you surely remember Harry himself expressing a similar opinion when Hermione and Ron press him to teach the other students DADA, because he is the most qualified person. Having lost the argument, he goes ahead and trains "Dumbledore's Army", and does, IIRC, a pretty competent job of it. So maybe he's more talented that either he or JKR lets on. From hickengruendler at yahoo.de Thu Jan 12 08:53:08 2006 From: hickengruendler at yahoo.de (hickengruendler) Date: Thu, 12 Jan 2006 08:53:08 -0000 Subject: Wedding after DD's death (was: Re: Mrs. Figg (Was: Dursleys)) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146294 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Ceridwen" wrote: > > Objectively, I wouldn't hold a wedding so soon after the funeral of a > dear friend. But odder emotional events have happened in the books. > And a joyful event like a wedding following on the heels of a sad event > like a funeral might affirm hope for the future. And since Bill was > injured in the attack, it could be a personal affirmation for both him > and Fleur. Also, they may decide to get it done and over with quickly > to free everyone up for the coming battle(s). > > Ceridwen. > Hickengruendler: Also, we shouldn't forget that Dumbledore isn't that close to Bill and Fleur. Sure, he is the leader of the Order, and both had probably some high hopes that he would help leading the good side to victory, but that's still far away from him being a dear friend of them. Fleur, especially, only met him during the Triwizard Tournament, and it isn't even clear that she had seen him since then. He was Bill's headmaster, but he was the headmaster of many students, and hardly anyone was as close to him as Harry. It's like the death of a nice old man who lived in your town/village. It's of course a sad incident and you go to the funeral, but there's no reason not to marry a few weeks later. From c.john at imperial.ac.uk Thu Jan 12 10:12:23 2006 From: c.john at imperial.ac.uk (esmith222002) Date: Thu, 12 Jan 2006 10:12:23 -0000 Subject: Knowledge about Lily and James In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146295 > > Who knows indeed, but I would like to speculate that dear Lucius > indeed referred to some specific acts which Lily and James did. If > they meddled in the matters dear Lucius thinks they should not have, > it is obviously connected to the fight against Voldemort IMO, > > The funny thing is that Lucius called them BOTH medlesome fools,so > that is something they did together, right? For some reason I don't > see James as a researcher. > > Again, just speculating. > > Alla > I wondered whether they were trying to gather proof as to who the 'Death Eaters' actually were. Clearly Lucius managed to maintain his 'mask' of decency even at the height of Voldemort's powers. Clearly this would make Lucius, with all his connections, very valuable to Voldemort. I think the OOTP would definitely regard it as in their remit to 'out' Death Eaters, and prove their allegiance to Voldemort. How Lucius ever managed to prove to Barty Crouch that he wasn't a Death Eater is beyond me!! Brothergib From vuurdame at xs4all.nl Thu Jan 12 10:32:59 2006 From: vuurdame at xs4all.nl (festuco) Date: Thu, 12 Jan 2006 10:32:59 -0000 Subject: Knowledge about Lily and James In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146296 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "esmith222002" wrote: > I wondered whether they were trying to gather proof as to who > the 'Death Eaters' actually were. Clearly Lucius managed to maintain > his 'mask' of decency even at the height of Voldemort's powers. > Clearly this would make Lucius, with all his connections, very > valuable to Voldemort. I think the OOTP would definitely regard it as > in their remit to 'out' Death Eaters, and prove their allegiance to > Voldemort. How Lucius ever managed to prove to Barty Crouch that he > wasn't a Death Eater is beyond me!! > > Brothergib > I don't believe for a moment Lucius managed to prove it to Crouch. He proved it to Fudge together with a fat donation to one or another victim fund. Gerry, who believes the WW is in this aspect just like the Muggle world From ceridwennight at hotmail.com Thu Jan 12 10:29:13 2006 From: ceridwennight at hotmail.com (Ceridwen) Date: Thu, 12 Jan 2006 10:29:13 -0000 Subject: Wedding after DD's death (was: Re: Mrs. Figg (Was: Dursleys)) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146297 Hickengruendler: > > Also, we shouldn't forget that Dumbledore isn't that close to Bill > and Fleur. Sure, he is the leader of the Order, and both had > probably some high hopes that he would help leading the good side to > victory, but that's still far away from him being a dear friend of > them. Fleur, especially, only met him during the Triwizard > Tournament, and it isn't even clear that she had seen him since > then. He was Bill's headmaster, but he was the headmaster of many > students, and hardly anyone was as close to him as Harry. It's like > the death of a nice old man who lived in your town/village. It's of > course a sad incident and you go to the funeral, but there's no > reason not to marry a few weeks later. Ceridwen: I was thinking more of the Molly and Arthur, since the wedding is to be held at their house. Also, many of the guests will have known DD well. Harry, for one, MM, every member of the Order. But since Molly mentioned a quick wedding for her and Arthur during and because of VWI, it's very possible that they'll do it quickly, IMO. Ceridwen. From h2so3f at yahoo.com Thu Jan 12 11:53:36 2006 From: h2so3f at yahoo.com (h2so3f) Date: Thu, 12 Jan 2006 11:53:36 -0000 Subject: wonder who is guarding Azkaban now that the dementors are not there anymore. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146298 Corey the Unforgetable wrote: "Hi members. Just posting to keep my hand in. So you guys won't forget about me. Here is something I just thought of. Who is guarding Azkaban now that the Dementors are no more? Is it some of the left over Inferi or some other creatures or wizards or witches? Just throwing it out and seeing what happens." CH3ed: Hi Corey! Thanks for keep throwing in different stuff. I would say Azkaban is being guarded by MoM wizards now. As severe as Scrimgeor seems I don't think he is into employing dark creatures, especially now that Voldy is around being powerful again. CH3ed :O) From h2so3f at yahoo.com Thu Jan 12 12:04:07 2006 From: h2so3f at yahoo.com (h2so3f) Date: Thu, 12 Jan 2006 12:04:07 -0000 Subject: Nagini In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146299 MML wrote: " It occurred to me that the differences in the way JKR portrays the snake in book 1 compared to the snake in Books 5 and 6 (ie Nagini) serves to highlight the darker nature of the later books." CH3ed: Good point. The first 2 books do read more like children literature than the later books. I remember the news anchor mentioning that JKR wrote the books for children to grow up with (so the kids starts with PS/SS and then read the next book every year for 7 year). I don't know if that is really what JKR intended, but it fits to me. If I had started out reading PS/SS I might have been less inclined to read the whole thing since I'm older. Instead the first book I read was PoA. I was thinking about the bad effects of making something with a mind of its own a horcrux and wonder.... what is the likelihood of Nagini turning against Voldy in the end? What if Nagini is the last Horcrux left and she bites Voldy?... and then is killed by Harry? That wouldn't violate the prophecy since Voldy's body would die from the venom, and then really die for good at the hand of Harry when Harry kills Nagini (I'm assuming that Nagini's venom is not toxic to Voldy when taken orally, but just as lethal to him when injected into the blood stream). SSSusan wrote: (on the other Nagini thread) Hee. I know you didn't mean it this way, but when I read the sentence "Couldn't LV have used L. Malfoy instead?," I admit that my mind thought you meant couldn't LV have **possessed* Lucius instead of Nagini. So I had this visual image of Voldy-in-Lucius, making him do all kinds of stuff like a puppeteer, and of its shortening Lucius' life. As if Nagini is more valuable to Voldy in the end, and he'd surely want to preserve the length of her life over Lucius's. Siriusly Snapey Susan, submitting a totally worthless post, but hey.... CH3ed: Oy, that would really be some scene, ay? :O) It definitely is a lot more fun than just ordering Lucius to snoop around. I wonder if Narcissa will protest. ;O) Carol wrote in Nagini as a Horcrux thread: "Harry (seeing from the snake's POV in his vision) thinks her thoughts as well as Voldemort's. The thoughts have merged into a single entity--Nagini doesn't distinguish betwwen her own desires and Voldemort's--but she still senses a conflict between her desire to bite and her actual mission, which relates to the Prophecy orb in the Department of Mysteries. (I'm sure this dual nature is what DD is referring to as "in essence divided"--one body, two natures or selves.)" CH3ed: I thought that the conflict between the desire to bite and the desire to just get thru the door was between LV/Nagini and Harry, but I like Carol's read better. It does neatly explain that DD silver smoke experiment and his comment (which I never could figure out the meaning before). Thanks!! CH3ed :O) From patriciah711 at yahoo.com Thu Jan 12 04:56:05 2006 From: patriciah711 at yahoo.com (Patricia Hurley) Date: Wed, 11 Jan 2006 20:56:05 -0800 (PST) Subject: Wandless Harry and his powers In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20060112045605.14984.qmail@web52813.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 146300 Harry Flashman wrote: > It does not add up, at the very least Harry should have > some extra-ordinary skills that would make him stand out when > compared to his peers. > > Maybe Harry will love Voldemort into death? Wouldn't that be > great? I think Harry would have to show a lot more power (even > with his ability to love) to finally take on and best Voldemort. > But this does not appear to be very likely as JKR seems determined > to keep Harry as an average wizard at best. Perhaps a rush of adrenaline... You know like those mothers who lift cars off of their children. Maybe magic works the same way. This could also apply to pre-Hogwarts wizards who only exhibit magical powers when they are stressed adn strain... think Harry ending up on a school roof. Could be. patriciah711 From patriciah711 at yahoo.com Thu Jan 12 05:00:55 2006 From: patriciah711 at yahoo.com (Patricia Hurley) Date: Wed, 11 Jan 2006 21:00:55 -0800 (PST) Subject: Half-Blood Prince disappointing In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20060112050055.50352.qmail@web52807.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 146301 Harry: > What a disappointing book! I think JKR spent to many pages on > unneeded details. I mean did we need page after page watching > how Harry convinced Slughorn to come back to Hogwarts? Could > not Dumbledore simply have introduced Slughorn and then later > told Harry that the reason he (DD) suspects that Slughorn took > the job was so that he could add Harry to his club? > > Often I got the impression that JKR was simply trying to fill > pages. So much more plot could have been developed and loose > ends started to be tied. JKR often times spends pages with what seems like mundane details, that often end up being very relevant. The point of showing Harry convincing Slughorn to go back to school was to show the power of Lily and Slughorn's connection. This then plays an important role in Harry's attempt at gathering the Horcrux memory. I personally adore JKR's indepth details for what they are: Thorough charecterizations, settings, and enough information to keep all her fans who are devouring these "unneeded" details very happy. I'm afraid you will find yourself very much in the minority with your opinion. PH From bawa_hrishikesh at yahoo.com Thu Jan 12 07:53:37 2006 From: bawa_hrishikesh at yahoo.com (Hrishikesh) Date: Thu, 12 Jan 2006 07:53:37 -0000 Subject: Life Debts Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146302 We know that one wizard owes a life debt to another when his/her life is saved by particular wizard, ala Wormtail to Harry, & Severus to Prongs. I would now like to speculate that what if creatures could also owe a life debt too, as BuckBeak, & the boa to Harry. I cannot remember any book canon to it though, but in the PoA movie, we see Buckbeak saving Harry's & Hermione's life from Lupin as a werewolf! Also maybe Harry may get help from the Boa to get rid of Nagini, or some info. about Nagini! May be LV increased Nagini's life in spite of possessing her, by giving her some magical abilities due to being a horcux, in turn for the life debt thing of providing him nourishment through her venom (or vice-versa?). Also, we do not know what role Wormtail has to play as of yet to get rid of his life debt. Just speculating though, but views, discussions, arguments, etc., highly welcome! From keeley_cargill at yahoo.com Thu Jan 12 08:38:01 2006 From: keeley_cargill at yahoo.com (keeley_cargill) Date: Thu, 12 Jan 2006 08:38:01 -0000 Subject: Mrs. Figg (Was: Dursleys) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146303 Steve wrote: SNIP > Still we know Harry's protection at the Dursleys is waning. > When he turns 17, he becomes as vulnerable there as he is > everywhere. Though, in a sense, he is probably more vulnerable > because, being the good guy that he is, Harry wouldn't hesitate > to defend the Dursleys. > > Still, even the timing of an attack on the Dursleys doesn't > quite seem right. Harry has a lot of plans for the summer, and > I can't see him hanging around the Dursley for four whole weeks. > I say two at best. Then he is off to Gordic's Hollow, back for > the Weasley wedding, then off to his life, the Horcrux hunt, > and the final battle with Voldemort. For there to be an attack > on the Dursleys, Harry needs an excuse to return to the Dursleys > after he has left and after he turns 17; I really can't come up > with a good excuse for this return, and I can't come up with any > likelihood of a DE attack before Harry turns 17. > SNIP Harry's protection at Dursleys' lasts until he is 17, as you point out, but also as long as he can call 4 Privet Drive home. If Harry leaves before he is 17, never to return, the protection ends at that point. Besides, there is nothing to stop Harry going to Godric's Hollow and the Weasley wedding whilst staying at the Dursleys'. I believe that there will be an attack on Privet Drive and Mrs Fig will get involved, magically or not. I also like to think that Draco will redeem himself in the attack by saving the Trio and telling them where to find the Horcrux Auntie Bella was keeping. A lot of plot advancement in just a few pages! Just my opinion Keeley From maria8162001 at yahoo.com Thu Jan 12 11:53:58 2006 From: maria8162001 at yahoo.com (Maria Vaerewijck) Date: Thu, 12 Jan 2006 03:53:58 -0800 (PST) Subject: Half-Blood Prince disappointing In-Reply-To: <20060112003254.64618.qmail@web53302.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20060112115358.30474.qmail@web53206.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 146304 Harry Flashman wrote: > > > > Harry needs to kill Voldemort but clearly does not have the > > skill (at least at the end of HBP) to do so. Luckdragon: > > As for Killing LV, I do not believe Harry will have to commit > murder. The prophecy said "Vanquish", not kill. There is a > possibility Harry with the help of his supporters will find a > way to destroy LV without killing him. LV wants power; a person > is only as powerful as his supporters make him. If LV's > supporters were to abandon him and everyone turned against him, > then he could be defeated. Also as LV has willingly given up > pieces of his soul and those pieces are destroyed is it really > murder? Maria: I agree with Luckdragon, Harry doesn't have to kill Voldy. By vanquishing Voldy, means Harry have to vanquish Voldy's powers and I guess if Dumbledore is alive somehow that is what he would be working on to find ways to help Harry vanquish Voldy's power. He had to do his master plan (his death) to be able to work undetected by everybody, especially Voldemort and at the same time help Harry. Rememeber in the Order of the Phoenix when Dumbledore told Voldy that there are other ways of destroying a man? I guess what he means then is by stripping Voldy of his powers. What could be more worse than death for a wizard than being alive and without power/magic and live like a muggle? Can you imagine Voldy living like a muggle again? Much worse than before he went to Hogwarts because then in the end he would not have any power or any magical ability anymore. Just a thought and I would go for it the JKR will make an ending like this. From maria8162001 at yahoo.com Thu Jan 12 12:04:21 2006 From: maria8162001 at yahoo.com (Maria Vaerewijck) Date: Thu, 12 Jan 2006 04:04:21 -0800 (PST) Subject: Harry will not kill (was Half blood prince disappointing) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20060112120421.7638.qmail@web53204.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 146305 Tonks: > I am sure that JKR is not writing a book for children (or even > for adults) in which the hero kills. Harry will not even kill > in self defense. > > Snape also said that Harry is only a mediocre wizard and gets > by with luck and help from his friends. A lot like the rest of > us. JKR has said that the books are very moral. I think that > she has set Harry up to be a role model for children. Harry is > our role model too. He shows us how to go on Loving no matter > what. He screws up sometime, but carries on with a lot of > luck and the help of his friends. And in the end if he survives > it will be with luck and the help of his friends. If he dies, > it will be his sacrifice of Love. Well spoken Tonks, I thinks that is really the intentions of JKR especially as there's already so much killing in our mundane world. I believe she's writing a book that the hero, especially so young, doesn't have to kill at all and that she's really emphasizing more on love that love can overcome eveything. In all the Harry Potter books, Harry never killed anyone yet. And I don't think that Harry's going to die at the end, no he will survive as well as Voldemort, they will both, but one with no longer magical power and I count on Voldemort without power at the end. maria8162001 From alesiaglfyn at juno.com Thu Jan 12 12:54:10 2006 From: alesiaglfyn at juno.com (Bonnie Harvey) Date: Thu, 12 Jan 2006 12:54:10 -0000 Subject: Wedding after DD's death (was: Re: Mrs. Figg (Was: Dursleys)) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146306 > Ceridwen: > I was thinking more of the Molly and Arthur, since the wedding > is to be held at their house. Also, many of the guests will > have known DD well. Harry, for one, MM, every member of the > Order. But since Molly mentioned a quick wedding for her and > Arthur during and because of VWI, it's very possible that they'll > do it quickly, IMO. I think this goes back to the fact that the WW is at War. Doing work for my history thesis, it wasn't unusual to find recounts of British soldiers on leave during the Battle for Britain that would go to a funeral or memorial in the morning and a wedding in the afternoon either the next day or the same day, often for men who knew each other. This is especially true amongst pilots and sailors. Besides, I think after McGonagall's statement in the Hospital Wing about more love in the world, it would be pretty clear DD wouldn't want them to postpone their wedding because of his passing. Alesia From latha272 at indiatimes.com Thu Jan 12 09:08:13 2006 From: latha272 at indiatimes.com (scamjunk22) Date: Thu, 12 Jan 2006 09:08:13 -0000 Subject: Half-Blood Prince disappointing In-Reply-To: <20060112003254.64618.qmail@web53302.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146307 > Harry Flashman wrote: > One other thing that occurred to me is that while Harry has > survived Voldemort on several occasions, surviving and killing > are 2 very different things. Harry needs to kill Voldemort but > clearly does not have the skill (at least at the end of HBP) to > do so. > Luckdragon: > As for Killing LV, I do not believe Harry will have to commit > murder. The prophecy said "Vanquish", not kill. There is a > possibility Harry with the help of his supporters will find a > way to destroy LV without killing him. LV wants power; a person > is only as powerful as his supporters make him. If LV's > supporters were to abandon him and everyone turned against him, > then he could be defeated. Also as LV has willingly given up > pieces of his soul and those pieces are destroyed is it really > murder? I was just wondering when I was reading this ... Death is something that occurs to everyone who is born (I mean biologically, and so, please do not spin off on the born once and born again thought process ..). It is the rule of nature that death come to the physical body. Now there are actually two things coming to my mind -- (i) in marking HP as his equal --- the prophecy itself did not say that LV would be vanquished the moment HP is marked as his equal -- right? But still LV lost his body. So, the big question is, in taking measures against death, hasn't the prophecy already been fulfilled and LV thwarted the prophecy with his horcruxes? (ii) this is more of a religious belief question -- I have always been told, and have read in numerous books that discuss death, that the soul would depart as a whole when death comes. Every person born in this mortal world HAS to die someday. So, whether you keep your soul in pieces or as a whole, death is an inevitability. isn't it so? I am not an expert in this matter of course, for I haven't died yet .... and I don't really expect answers to this query ... but still, just wondering. Also, if the 7th part in LV body dies due to natural causes .... how on earth does he think he has conquered death? He would still need someone's help to resurrect him ... and nobody knows where his horcruxes are! A big HA HA to the very idea of defeating death..... Scam -- shell-shocked by her own brilliance ... and sooo happy that if HP can't kill LV, then age will :)))) From bartl at sprynet.com Thu Jan 12 15:27:33 2006 From: bartl at sprynet.com (Bart Lidofsky) Date: Thu, 12 Jan 2006 10:27:33 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: magic late in life In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <43C67565.5010205@sprynet.com> No: HPFGUIDX 146308 Tonks wrote: > I think that the most likely candidate is Filch. But the question > will be, what side will he be on?? Is he a bitter man because of > what he lacks and when he gets it will change his ways? Bart: Filch is obsessed with the rules, and following them. Which makes his name especially odd, since he's the last person who would filch ANYTHING. Bart From foxmoth at qnet.com Thu Jan 12 15:54:28 2006 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Thu, 12 Jan 2006 15:54:28 -0000 Subject: Spies, Lies and Self fullfilling prophecies In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146309 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "kchuplis" wrote: > > I've tried searching but I just cannot find it. A while back, pippin was talking about ESE!Lupin and I got the impression that some people believe there was another spy besides Wormtail. What I've never been able to figure out from posts is where does that idea come from? I apologize if it has been discussed but I just couldn't find it. Pippin: The plot to frame Sirius was underway before Godric's Hollow, from what Fudge and McGonagall say, so it's almost certain that Voldemort, not Peter, was behind it. Yet if Godric's Hollow had gone as Voldemort had planned, framing Sirius would have been pointless from the point of view of protecting his spy --if the spy was really Pettigrew. LV couldn't count on Sirius not getting a chance to tell his side of things, or Dumbledore being distracted by the need to protect baby Harry! Pettigrew could hardly have continued to spy on the Order after being outed as the Secret Keeper, or faking his own death, so why frame Sirius at all? But if the true spy was a third party, then everything makes sense. Voldemort has a long history of framing people for his crimes, and the crimes of his supporters. A double bluff would certainly not be beyond his cunning. Both Snape and Sirius thought that Lupin was aiding the Death Eaters. We never learn how this suspicion came about, but I don't think it's safe to dismiss it, especially since JKR has gone about showing us how unlikely the implied reasons really are. Would Sirius have suspected his old friend Lupin of being a spy only because he was a werewolf? Hagrid is half-giant, goes off on a mission to his relatives and comes back behaving very strangely, yet it never crosses any of the Trio's minds to think he might be plotting against Dumbledore. Snape hates all the Marauders, but why suspect Lupin and not Pettigrew and even James? After all, others have betrayed their families for Voldie. Then there's Wormtail himself. He's secretive, and clever enough, and he was close to Lily and James, but that could be said of all the people in Moody's photograph. Beyond that there are troubling discrepancies between the Pettigrew we observe and what we are told or can deduce about Wormtail the Spy. McGonagall says Peter was hopeless at duelling. Sirius calls him a weak wizard. He was unable to heal his bleeding arm and needed Voldemort to provide him with a magical prosthetic. Yes, he learned the animagus spell, but apparently that doesn't take a lot of magical power. Sirius could do it even while a prisoner in Azkaban at the mercy of the dementors. What discourages people from becoming Animagi, JKR says, is that it takes years and years of study, with no guarantee that the animal you'll become is a useful one. Apparently it's a matter of mental ability more than power, much like occlumency. Wormtail the Spy, OTOH, is supposed to have killed twelve people with a single spell. This contradicts not only much that we're told about Peter but much else we know about magic. Eye contact is supposed to be important, all the spells we've seen are directional, yet Wormtail is supposed to have cast, with a wand held behind his back, a spell that killed everyone within twenty feet of himself yet left him unharmed. ::raises eyebrows:: Murder tears the soul, even Voldemort can't remain untouched by it, yet after supposedly killing twelve people, Pettigrew lives twelve years in peace and certainly doesn't lose any sleep over his supposed crime. The one time he sounds sincere in the Shrieking Shack is when he claims credit for having put Sirius Black in Azkaban. If Pettigrew was innocent of being the spy, he would naturally think that Sirius had made him Secret Keeper to set him up. Anyone spying on Dumbledore would need to be good at occlumency, yet there's no hint that Peter has any such ability. His emotions always seem very close to the surface. Both Voldemort and Harry can read him like a book. Peter's health collapsed at the mere thought that Sirius might be after him, yet Wormtail the Spy was able to carry on in the highly stressful job of double agent, knowing the hunt was up, for an entire year without drawing any suspicion onto Peter. Wormtail the Spy was supposedly a fanatical follower of Lord Voldemort, expecting to become second in command once Voldemort was in power, but Peter is shown cooperating only reluctantly. Wormtail the Spy supposedly captured Bertha Jorkins and brought her straight to Voldemort, but how could Petttigrew have done that? He was still searching for Voldemort when he arrived at the inn where he found Bertha, wasn't he? How did he know where to take her? In HBP, we see Wormtail shunning any dangerous work, though he's supposed to have taken such tremendous risks in the past. For such a clever spy, it's strange that he's scarcely able to eavesdrop without getting caught. Furthermore, Snape refers to him as 'vermin' and treats him very shabbily, evidently with Voldemort's permission. It's strange that a fanatically ambitious Death Eater would put up with that, even stranger that he would be content to live twelve years as a rat, when he could have been scheming to bring his master back to power. It sounds like Peter and Wormtail the Spy are two different people, doesn't it? Pippin From foxmoth at qnet.com Thu Jan 12 16:17:37 2006 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Thu, 12 Jan 2006 16:17:37 -0000 Subject: Half blood prince disappointing In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146310 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Harry Flashman" wrote: > > > Harry's training with DD could have been more than just learning about > Voldemorts horcruxes. In the cave DD tells harry that magic always > leaves traces yet does not tell harry how to spot such traces, even > though it is expected that harry will go in search of other horcruxes. > DD does not impart any special wisdom/knowledge that Harry will need > to overcome the immensely powerful defenses that Voldemort has put > around his horcruxes, or help harry form relationships with other > intelligent magical creatures who clearly respect DD and whose help > Harry might need. Almost as if DD simply left harry to fend for > himself, and unless DD is not really dead and will return in the next > book to lead harry to the remaining horcruxes and train him to > successfully fight (and kill) Voldemort, Harry will have a learn a lot > himself and awfully fast. > Pippin: Beginning with GoF, the struggle between Harry and Voldemort has become more and more psychological. If this trend continues, it will probably disappoint a lot of people who want to read about wizards making things blow up . It would take Harry four years of study to learn as much as the greenest Auror, and yet Voldemort can kill Aurors just as easily as anyone else, so magical training is not the answer. But Dumbledore said that Harry has a gift of flitting into Voldemort's mind undetected and without harm to himself. I believe Dumbledore was playing to this strength in teaching Harry. Voldemort is currently using occlumency to block Harry's access to his mind. Yet we saw in HBP that Voldemort's emotional control is not perfect -- in each pensieve episode, his control flickers a bit. If Harry can gain control of his legilimens powers and take advantage of such lapses, he may be able to hunt for the information he needs in the mind of his enemy. But since even a legilimens cannot read a mind like a book, Harry will need background if he is to have any hope of interpreting what he sees in Voldemort's mind. Thus Harry, and the reader, need a thorough grounding in Voldemort's past. With that information, Harry may be able to find out where the horcruxes are from Voldemort himself! Pippin From xcpublishing at yahoo.com Thu Jan 12 16:23:35 2006 From: xcpublishing at yahoo.com (Cheryl) Date: Thu, 12 Jan 2006 16:23:35 -0000 Subject: Cheating Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146311 I know we're not supposed to bring up the Cinema-That-Must-Not-Be- Named, but I've kind of been using it to "cheat" when trying to figure out what is coming in the next book and the discussion about who is using magic late in life has made me think about the CTMNBN. Figg does not appear at all and in the latest film there is a VERY prominent scene of Filch marching into the Great Hall. I can't remember why he does this, but it struck me as strange at the time. He's been a pretty prominent figure in all of them. On a related note, there is a scene in the third CTMNBN that shook my firm belief in ESE!Snape. Harry, Ron, and Hermione had just exited the tunnel from the shrieking shack and Lupin started to transform. Snape burst out of the tunnel in a rage, then spotted the werewolf and "instinctively" leaped in front of the kids to protect them. This was such an obvious scene that I had to wonder if JKR would have let them keep it in there if Snape were really all that evil... I used to think good ole' Snapey was ESE! but now I gotta wonder. Also, did anyone notice in HBP that when Snape was talking to Narcissa about Draco that Snape said, "I happen to know about Draco's mission." However, no one ever actually mentioned what Draco's mission was. Did Snape REALLY know? Or was he just pulling Bella's chain and got in a bit over his head when Narcissa asked for the UV? Nicky Joe From kchuplis at alltel.net Thu Jan 12 16:34:19 2006 From: kchuplis at alltel.net (Karen) Date: Thu, 12 Jan 2006 10:34:19 -0600 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Spies, Lies and Self fullfilling prophecies References: Message-ID: <001001c61796$09808a30$b301010a@ConsolidatedTelephone.local> No: HPFGUIDX 146312 pippin: Both Snape and Sirius thought that Lupin was aiding the Death Eaters. We never learn how this suspicion came about, but I don't think it's safe to dismiss it, especially since JKR has gone about showing us how unlikely the implied reasons really are. kchuplis: OK, here is where I get confused....where do Snape and Sirius say they suspected Lupin of aiding Death Eaters? pippin: Furthermore, Snape refers to him as 'vermin' and treats him very shabbily, evidently with Voldemort's permission. It's strange that a fanatically ambitious Death Eater would put up with that, even stranger that he would be content to live twelve years as a rat, when he could have been scheming to bring his master back to power. It sounds like Peter and Wormtail the Spy are two different people, doesn't it? kchuplis: Well, it could be spun that way, but I feel like I am in that Peanuts cartoon where they are looking at clouds and Linus expounds on how he sees shadows of complex historic icons and events but Charlie Brown says "I see a horsie and a bunny". Well......I see a horsey and a bunny. Wormtail/Peter just does whatever butters his bread. I don't think he's fanatical about being a Death Eater, he's just fanatical about staying on the side with what he sees as the most power in the end (and also while a rat, just, well, hiding). He's scared of everything. Especially anything that could kill him. He's had a buttload of luck in that he *hasn't* been killed. Killing a streetful of Muggles wouldn't really be that hard. It wasn't elegant or neat in any manner. I think the by-product of Sirius being arrested for it was not a "plan" but just fortunate for Wormtail. Before posting to any list, you MUST read the group's Admin File! http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/files/Admin_Files/HBF_Text__MUST_READ Please use accurate subject headings and snip unnecessary material from posts to which you're replying! YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS Visit your group "HPforGrownups" on the web. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: HPforGrownups-unsubscribe at yahoogroups.com Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. From xcpublishing at yahoo.com Thu Jan 12 16:49:10 2006 From: xcpublishing at yahoo.com (Cheryl) Date: Thu, 12 Jan 2006 16:49:10 -0000 Subject: Subject: Who dies in 7? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146313 This started on OT Chatter but Katherine's response was too good so I pulled it over. >> Quote from this interview: >> >> "In the seventh book there will be deaths of both, goodies and >> baddies. She was talking to her husband, Neil, the other day, after >> she has just writing the death of one particular character. He >> shuddered. "Oh don't do that", he said to me, but of course, I >>did." >> >> I have a question about this, because I often interpret this kind >>of thing wrong. >> JKR was referring in this quote to the death of Dumbledore or to >>the death of another character in the 7 book?. >Katherine: >I think this is definitely book 7. And I think that it's probably gonna be Hagrid who bites it. Also, consider that she's doing press, and she WANTS us all to be up in arms. It could be anyone. Seriously, maybe Neil is a big fan of Percy Weasley. As far as deaths go, I'd bet the following: >1. Hagrid >2. Hedwig >3. Flitwick >4. Charlie Weasley >Her pattern in creating conflict seems to be: >1 major shocking death. For this I vote Hagrid; book 6 was DD. Hagrid is still a major character but one who has lost his narrative neccessity. Why is he still hanging around? So she can drop some Glaswegian dialect from time to time? No, because she knew she needed him to die in Seven. Nicky Joe: For major shocking death I either vote for Hagrid or Hermione. Let's face it, she hasn't been all that helpful in the last couple of books. She can probably help Harry locate the Horcruxes, but after that she could easily be disposed of. It would happen right after Ron and Hermione decide they really do like each other. I do like your Hagrid theory, though. >1 Personally-affecting Harry loss. For this I vote Hedwig; we haven't had such a thing since the Nimbus was decimated. Instead we've had major fights with either Ron or Hermione. Now that the fighting with Ron and/or Hermione is done to death, we're back to Hedwig. She can't structurally give him another broomstick loss without looking tired. So bye-bye Hedwig. Nicky Joe: The Hermione thing would take care of this, also. Harry just doesn't seem that attached to Hedwig, not enough for JKR to kill off the owl. Unlike Hermione, who cuddles and fawns all over that cat of hers. >1 Total screwup at Hogwarts. We've had DADA teachers who were crazy, Divination teachers who were useless or obscure, Hagrid's many absences and the death of DD. So now we've got to muck about with the school a bit. Flitwick is the charms teacher. I predict Harry's growing closer to Flitwick as he learns more about his mother's prowess in Charms--only to have Flitwick bite it in the end. Nicky Joe: I would vote for Trelawney on this one. LV might decide to take her out to avoid any more of those pesky prophecies she might spit out. >1 Rocking of the Weasley boat. The Weasleys are Harry's surrogate family. There needs to be some conflict there. First it was "they're broke." Then it was "Percy is an Ass." Then it was "Percy is An Ass on the Wrong Side." Then it was "Bill's been bitten by Greyback." This time someone's gonna die. Could be anyone--how sadistic is Rowling? If she were smart she'd axe Charlie--he's outlived his purpose, since I doubt we'll need any more dragons disposed of or dealt with. If she were middling cruel she'd send one (or both) twins to their mortal end. But that kills her biggest tool for comic relief, so I can't see her doing that. Besides, the joke shop is a dead-useful source of material. It'll also give the gang a place to serve as their Diagon Alley Safe Haven now that the Leaky Cauldron is compromised. If she wants to be really mean as a snake (ha!) she'll kill Arthur. Harry already has one Patron--James. Arthur is secondary in his psychological needs. But, I'm betting she'll get her big bang from Hagrid, so Charlie is her Weasley Sacrifice. Nicky Joe: I had a really gruesome thought on this one. What if it's ONE of the twins? Now that would be horrifying. Would one twin even be able to function without the other? That would be especially cruel of JKR. I don't think Charlie has been in the books enough to be a Weasley sacrifice. What about Molly? She is an Order member, after all. I can see her charging into battle to protect her family. That would be a bigger blow than Arthur, actually. Harry has had quite a few father-figures - Sirius, Lupin, Dumbledore, even Hagrid on occasion. But Molly is Harry's only mother-figure. From foxmoth at qnet.com Thu Jan 12 17:48:09 2006 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Thu, 12 Jan 2006 17:48:09 -0000 Subject: Spies, Lies and Self fullfilling prophecies In-Reply-To: <001001c61796$09808a30$b301010a@ConsolidatedTelephone.local> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146314 > kchuplis: > > OK, here is where I get confused....where do Snape and Sirius say they > suspected Lupin of aiding Death Eaters? > "It seems --almost impossible--that Black could have entered the school without inside help. I did express my concerns when you appointed--" PoA ch 9 "Not if he thought I was the spy, Peter," said Lupin. "I assume that's why you didn't tell me, Sirius?" he said casually over Pettigrew's head. "Forgive me, Remus," said Black. -- PoA ch 19 > kchuplis: Killing a streetful of Muggles wouldn't really be that hard. Pippin: It's hard to see how Pettigrew could have set off the explosion the way Sirius thinks he did. "he blew apart the street with the wand behind his back, killed everyone within twenty feet of himself --" PoA ch 19. He'd have been more likely to blow his own buttocks off, if you believe Moody's little lecture on wand safety in OOP. That's a big risk to go through for someone soley dedicated to saving his own skin. Pippin From tonks_op at yahoo.com Thu Jan 12 17:54:43 2006 From: tonks_op at yahoo.com (Tonks) Date: Thu, 12 Jan 2006 17:54:43 -0000 Subject: Subject: Who dies in 7? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146315 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Cheryl" wrote: > > This started on OT Chatter but Katherine's response was too good so I pulled it over. > > >> Quote from this interview: > >> "In the seventh book there will be deaths of both, goodies and > >> baddies. She was talking to her husband, Neil, the other day, after she has just writing the death of one particular character. He > >> shuddered. "Oh don't do that", he said to me, but of course, I > >>did." Tonks here: Well let's look at who Harry cares about the most. Ginny Ron Hermione Hagrid Molly Arthur Lupin McGonagall Any and all on this list could be a goner by the end. At least one Weasley, maybe more will have to go. I fear we will have to kill Ron. Isn't his wand core Unicorn? Of course, JKR says that the wand cores of the three wands are important, so all three (H/R/H) may have to live till the end. On the other hand, Ron could be useful on the other side if his wand goes with him? But I don't think you get to take your wand there. The person killed off early could be McGonagall. That would throw the school into a spin again. And I think that McGonagall has knowledge about DD and Snape that will be lost by her death. She may be the only other one to know the truth about Snape and what side he is on and why. This way Snape will have to contact Harry himself. And with DD, McGonagall and Snape gone from the school, we will have lost all of the head persons. The "trinity" as some here have pointed out. My guess is that this is going to be bad, really, really bad. It is a "war" after all. We have to put Harry in a very bad place emotionally. So maybe all of his friends will have to die. Somehow, Harry will be all alone. Harry will be suffering a great deal of grief unbearable grief. There are others options too: Let's say that Harry is going to live. In that case Ron and Hermione will have to die. If Harry is the one to die, maybe Ginny will go with him. This is keeping the shipping together. I don't know if we have to do that, but if there is to be a happy ending I think that somehow Ron and Hermione and Harry and Ginny have to end up together on the same side of the veil. Another guess is that the Dark Lord captures Ron, or maybe Hermione and Ginny too. There again, does Ginny have any important part in the end or is her role done? If the point of Ginny is that Harry is giving up everything and eventually his own life, then maybe we are done with Ginny and her presence in the last book will be very slight. It all depends on if Harry is going to die or live. So I think we have look at book 7 back to front. Bad guys dying: Draco - This would cause the Malfoys to possible change sides. We would see sister against sister. And what will happen to Lucius? He is too rich of a character to let disappear in Azkaban. Maybe we will see that he really does have some "feeling" for his son. Certainly the death of Draco would give a lot of fuel to some serious action on the Dark side. Snape, of course will have to die at some point in the book. I think that is a given. I would not expect it early on, however. He is far too important to kill off early. Could be some minor bad guys killed too. All in all as death goes, I think that JKR will have to (sad to say), top what she has done up to now. That means that book 7 will be worse (emotionally) for all of us than any other book up to now. And it will have to be far worse for poor Harry. Whether he ends up alive or dead in the end, it is going to be a soul wrenching experience for us all, and Harry most of all. But somehow, someway, she will, by the grace of God, bring it all to a good end. What a job!! She has painted herself into a corner here; let's hope that she can pull it off. Tonks_op From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Thu Jan 12 18:15:19 2006 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Thu, 12 Jan 2006 18:15:19 -0000 Subject: Voldie and the aging process (Was: Half-Blood Prince disappointing) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146316 Scam wrote: > Death is something that occurs to everyone who is born (I mean biologically, and so, please do not spin off on the born once and born again thought process ..). It is the rule of nature that death come to the physical body. > > Also, if the 7th part in LV body dies due to natural causes .... how on earth does he think he has conquered death? He would still need someone's help to resurrect him ... and nobody knows where his horcruxes are! A big HA HA to the very idea of defeating death..... > > Scam -- shell-shocked by her own brilliance ... and sooo happy > that if HP can't kill LV, then age will :)))) Carol responds: The point of the Horcruxes is to keep Voldemort's soul on earth, to prevent it from going through the Veil, so to speak. As long as even one Horcrux remains, Voldemort can't die, even if his body is destroyed, as it was at Godric's Hollow. It doesn't matter where the Horcruxes are. As long as they exist intact, the seventh part of his soul, the part that's attached to his spirit and his identity, can't die, no matter what happens to his body. That's why his soul left his body at Godric's Hollow but remained on earth as Vapor!mort. The Horcruxes he had made, all of them intact at that time, kept him from dying. Evidently, LV had taken measures to prevent physical death before Godric's Hollow. He tells the Death Eaters at GoF that they know of his plans to defeat death, yet it's unlikely that he's told them about his Horcruxes. (Bellatrix, who is not present, may be an exception; Lucius Malfoy certainly didn't know that the diary was a Horcrux, only that it had something to do with the monster in the Chamber of Secrets.) We can speculate that his experiments included everything from immunizing himself to snake venom to attempts to slow or stop the effects of aging. (If wizards have aging potions that even the Twins can make, they surely have anti-aging potions as well. Maybe part of young Snape's job as a DE was to keep Voldie well supplied with such potions.) At any rate, Voldie's new body does seem to be mortal (he admits as much to the DEs in the graveyard scene in GoF), but that doesn't concern him at the moment. He wants to get rid of the one wizard he perceives as a threat, Harry Potter; then he can return to mundane matters like ensuring physical immortality. Assuming that his resurrected body, despite its snakelike features and other peculiar characteristics, is subject to the normal aging process (and I'm not certain that it is), the worst that could happen is that he would become like Tithonus, the mortal man who was granted immortal life so he could live with the goddess Eos (Aurora) on Mount Olympus, but Eos forgot to ask Zeus to grant him eternal youth. So his spirit couldn't die, but his body withered away until eventually she turned him into an insect (not a likely fate for LV, of course). I don't think Voldie would allow himself to suffer a similar fate, and if he discovered signs of aging in his resurrected body after, say, a hundred years of living in it, he would use whatever means he could to counter the aging, if necessary, possessing other wizards (preferably young ones) to keep himself alive and embodied. (I don't think we'll need to worry about it because Harry will find a way to destroy him permanently; I'm only thinking of what LV might face if Harry died.) But LV cannot be killed or permanently destroyed while the Horcruxes exist. If a deflected Avada Kedavra curse can't kill him, neither can old age. The most either can do is to destroy his body, and unlike an AK, death from old age gives plenty of warning that it's coming, and Voldie, powerful and cunning as he is, would use whatever means he considered necessary to prevent it. To put all this in its simplest form: While even one Horcrux exists, the soul fragment in Voldie can't die even if his body dies (frpm old age or any other cause). So Harry *will* have to kill or otherwise destroy LV, body *and* soul, after he's destroyed the Horcruxes that keep LV's soul from leaving the earth and passing beyond the Veil. Carol, noting that if Voldie could be defeated by old age, there'd be no need for the Chosen One and we'd have no story From newbrigid at yahoo.com Thu Jan 12 16:17:42 2006 From: newbrigid at yahoo.com (Lia) Date: Thu, 12 Jan 2006 08:17:42 -0800 (PST) Subject: LV's philosophy In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20060112161742.4148.qmail@web31715.mail.mud.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 146317 Luckdragon wrote: So how is it that all of his followers and affiliates do not realize that LV is out for himself alone and really has none of their interests at heart? How is it that they blindly follow someone who goes against his own philosophy...What will it take for everyone to realize that the philosophy touted by LV is a load of bunk? Lia replies: Sadly, as history itself shows us, sometimes folk, once deluded, never realize that someone's philosophy is, as you say, "a load of bunk". They follow him/her wholeheartedly, rationalizing the changes, believing in the "vision", twisted as it might prove. Witness Hitler and his followers, for instance. Though Hitler himself was far from the ideal he espoused (in many ways, including his ethnicity and appearance), many believed in his "philosophy" and adhered to his rule. Voldemort displays some of the same megalomaniacal traits, frankly--his obsession with race and purity, his self-centered nature, and his sadism among them. Still, as with Hitler, there are others that find his views attractive, abhorrent though they may be to the rest of us. For example, Bellatrix clearly cleaves to Voldemort as ardently as Eva Braun, be she spouse or no. Hitler destroyed himself. Perhaps, in a way, Voldemort may too, though Harry (and his ability to love) may prove to be instrumental to his downfall, given the prophecy. --Lia, recalling that Dumbledore defeated Grindelwald, who has been supposed to be an allegory for Hitler From GAP5685 at AOL.com Thu Jan 12 18:57:20 2006 From: GAP5685 at AOL.com (gwen_of_the_oaks) Date: Thu, 12 Jan 2006 18:57:20 -0000 Subject: Spies, Lies and Self fullfilling prophecies In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146318 first kchuplis: > > > > OK, here is where I get confused....where do Snape and Sirius say they suspected Lupin of aiding Death Eaters? > > then pippin: > "It seems --almost impossible--that Black could have entered the school without inside help. I did express my concerns when you appointed--" > PoA ch 9 > > Pippin > Now Gwen: I'm not 100% convinced by that quote. Snape - the one who sent LV after the Potters in the first place - knows that Sirius isnt a Death Eater. He may well believe that Sirius is guilty of blowing up Pettigrew and deserved time in Azkaban for the crime, but he knows Sirius never came running when the Voldy called them. So while he is most assuredly accusing Lupin of helping Sirius here, that is not,IMO, the same thing as accusing Lupin of helping Death Eaters. Gwen From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Thu Jan 12 19:13:50 2006 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Thu, 12 Jan 2006 19:13:50 -0000 Subject: Spies, Lies and Self fullfilling prophecies In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146319 kchuplis wrote (asking the same question that arose in my mind as I read Pippin's post): > > OK, here is where I get confused....where do Snape and Sirius say they suspected Lupin of aiding Death Eaters? Pippin supplied these quotes from PoA as canon support: > [Snape:]"It seems --almost impossible--that Black could have entered the school without inside help. I did express my concerns when you appointed--" and > "Not if he thought I was the spy, Peter," said Lupin. "I assume that's why you didn't tell me, Sirius?" he said casually over Pettigrew's head. > > "Forgive me, Remus," said Black. > -- PoA ch 19 Carol responds: What the Snape quote illustrates, IMO, is simply Snape's belief (repeated in the Shrieking Shack) that Lupin is helping Black get into the school. He believes (understandably) that Black tried to murder him when they were both sixteen, and like everyone else in the WW, that Black murdered Pettigrew and twelve Muggles. Black has succeeded in getting into the school, slashing up the Fat Lady's portrait like a "murderous, raving lunatic" (to quote movie!Ron). Snape, not knowing about the map or Black's ability to transform, concludes that someone must be helping Black get into the school and that the obvious person to do so is Lupin, who in Snape's view is putting old friendships above the safety of the students, and Harry in particular, by trying to smuggle a murderer into the school. But there's no indication from Snape's words that he believes Lupin was the spy who betrayed the Potters. It seems much more likely that he believes that the spy was the supposed murderer Sirius Black. Snape even seems to have tried somehow to warn James Potter against Black, but Potter was "too arrogant" to believe him. So, IMO, the only supposed DE that Snape thinks Lupin is helping is the "murderin' traitor" Black (to use Hagrid's words). By HBP, of course, Snape knows that the traitor/murderer was Pettigrew, whom he treats with contempt and labels as "vermin." But there's no indication that he holds Lupin in similar contempt, however much he still dislikes him. The Lupin/Black exchange, IMO, simply shows that each thought the other was a spy. Each knew that someone close to the Potters was the spy; each knew that he himself was not the spy; each underestimated Peter Pettigrew. That leaves only one suspect apiece: Lupin suspected Black and Black suspected Lupin. One had the Black family history to go on as "evidence"; the other had the alliance of many werewolves with Voldemort to support his suspicions. If PP was the spy, as canon so far clearly indicates, he would have played one against the other, meanwhile making himself look like the Potters' most loyal friend (note the photo of the old Order where he's sitting between James and Lily). He would not have needed to listen at doorways to be a spy. Everything he needed to hear would have been spoken in his hearing on the assumption that he was a loyal friend and a worshipper of James. Carol, who does see the little plot hole involving Bertha but thinks it's only an oversight on JKR's part, not evidence for ESE!Lupin From feenyjam at msu.edu Thu Jan 12 19:19:16 2006 From: feenyjam at msu.edu (greenfirespike) Date: Thu, 12 Jan 2006 19:19:16 -0000 Subject: Who is she talking about? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146320 In a recent interview, JK said: Death is the key to understanding JK Rowling. Her greatest fear - and she is completely unhesitant about this - is of someone she loves dying. "My books are largely about death. They open with the death of Harry's parents. There is Voldemort's obsession with conquering death and his quest for immortality at any price, the goal of anyone with magic. I so understand why Voldemort wants to conquer death. We're all frightened of it." In the seventh and final Harry Potter book there will be deaths of both goodies and baddies. She was talking to her husband, Neil, the other day, after she had just written the death of one particular character. "He shuddered. 'Oh, don't do that,' he said to me, but of course I did." And with one swirl of her pen, millions of children will weep or rejoice. Countless Harry Potter websites try to predict what will happen in the final book. "Neil is the only person I can talk to about what happens because he instantly forgets," she says, laughing. Do we have a guess who this is? My guess is a 'goodie', and that would be Neville. From ornawn at 013.net Thu Jan 12 19:42:57 2006 From: ornawn at 013.net (ornadv) Date: Thu, 12 Jan 2006 19:42:57 -0000 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: magic late in life Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146321 >CH3ed: >Actually, Figgy didn't see the dementors, but I believe she felt >them... and she saw what Harry did to repel them. Her demeanor >changed from when she was telling what dementors looked like (not >confident) to when she told of how they affected her (very >convincing and affected). >JKR made it clear on her website about Figgy's inability to see the >dementors. Orna: I won't argue with JKR. That leaves Figgy as an option for late- age magic. It's interesting ? if it's Figgy ? she's sure to be with the order. If this person is Filch, I'm not sure on whose side he will be ? he has a nasty temper, so he might enjoy joining the DE. OTOH, he is part of Hogwarts, and therefore perhaps has some better qualities in himself ? which weren't revealed until now. Perhaps his caring for Snape's leg in PS (Actually, why?), and his eternal love to Mrs. Norris, are signs of hope. I somehow think that if it turned out to be Filch ? I'm sure it would be interesting, since he is such a bizarre person. I have a feeling, it would look something like Sir Cadogan's job. Figgy, OTOH, if she doesn't acquire late-age magic, I'm afraid, she'll be killed ? having fulfilled her job on having an eye on Harry, until he's 17, she might be superfluous. Unless she just retires with her cats? Won't work too good in the heat of the war... >CH3ed is off to iron his hands and won't have any ice-cream tonight >for submitting his 4th post of the day. Sorry, Alika Elf. :O) Orna: I hope CH3ed didn't iron his hands, since his post helped clarify the issue, and I would feel guilty as hell. Enjoy your ice-cream! Orna From kchuplis at alltel.net Thu Jan 12 20:04:21 2006 From: kchuplis at alltel.net (Karen) Date: Thu, 12 Jan 2006 14:04:21 -0600 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Who is she talking about? References: Message-ID: <001a01c617b3$60e12330$b301010a@ConsolidatedTelephone.local> No: HPFGUIDX 146322 greenfirespike: Do we have a guess who this is? My guess is a 'goodie', and that would be Neville. kchuplis: You know, I really think poor Neville is just bound to bite it. Because he is so intricately involved in the prophecy, it just seems a necessary. I also think the fact that JKR nixed the Neville/Luna thing and it was pretty obvious that they were forming a bond, he just isn't going to make it. I only hope he goes usefully and bravely. I kind of wonder though if somehow LV becomes privy to the fact there was another baby and in a paranoic fit "just to make sure" and not knowing the rest of the prophecy, kills poor Neville. That could set up a pretty pychological gut punch for Harry, as well, in the "it's my fault again" mode. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From patriciah711 at yahoo.com Thu Jan 12 19:23:27 2006 From: patriciah711 at yahoo.com (Patricia Hurley) Date: Thu, 12 Jan 2006 11:23:27 -0800 (PST) Subject: ESE!Snape again WAS: Re: Cheating In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20060112192327.52409.qmail@web52801.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 146323 Nicky Joe: I used to think good ole' Snapey was ESE! but now I gotta wonder. Also, did anyone notice in HBP that when Snape was talking to Narcissa about Draco that Snape said, "I happen to know about Draco's mission." However, no one ever actually mentioned what Draco's mission was. Did Snape REALLY know? Or was he just pulling Bella's chain and got in a bit over his head when Narcissa asked for the UV? PH: I have trouble believing that JKR would just write off murdering Dumbledore as "getting in over his head". That said, I sometimes feel that perhaps Snape is not evil (though I try hard to fight that urge within myself). I do feel that there are times when Snape is genuinely good (trying to save the Sorcerer's Stone) but then if you look at differently he could just be acting evil under the cover of virtue (gather the philosopher's stone for personal use, or Voldy, rather than trying to keep it from Quirrell). I do however feel probably did not think - "Aha! This is the time to reveal he is good! I'll have him stand in front of the kids". It could very well just be a flaw in the portrayal.. Besides, even the worst people have some instinctual good. PH From babyhrndz at yahoo.com Thu Jan 12 18:49:38 2006 From: babyhrndz at yahoo.com (Amanda Shoffner) Date: Thu, 12 Jan 2006 10:49:38 -0800 (PST) Subject: ESE! Snape or not WAS: Re: Cheating In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20060112184938.37493.qmail@web30805.mail.mud.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 146324 Nicky Joe: I used to think good ole' Snapey was ESE! but now I gotta wonder. Also, did anyone notice in HBP that when Snape was talking to Narcissa about Draco that Snape said, "I happen to know about Draco's mission." However, no one ever actually mentioned what Draco's mission was. Did Snape REALLY know? Or was he just pulling Bella's chain and got in a bit over his head when Narcissa asked for the UV? Amanda: IMO: I do not think that Snape is ESE. Of all the wizards, DD is the one whose word I would trust the most. I believe he would take care in taking an 'ex-Death Eater' under his wing. If SS used occlumency, DD would know. DD can tell when a memory has been modified/etc. In addition, in every book, we see SS comming to the aid of Harry/DD. (all hardcover, US version) 1. SS/PS - Countercurse on Quirrell's magic on HP during the game. Helping DD protect the stone with potions obstacle. 2. CoS - HP used SS's potions for making 'polyjuice' potion. 3. PoA - Standing in front of HP/RW/HG putting himself at risk of werewolf!Lupin. I have always found it interestin how SS just happened to be in the area HP was in to catch him wondering the HUGE castle at night, Lupin right behind him 4. GoF - Was right beside DD and ready for helping when HP was with Moody!CrouchJr. with truth potion ready. 5. OoP - Continually giving the Order information on LV. 6. HBP - Why woud SS have an argument w/ DD at the edge of the forbidden forest saying 'I want out'. I strongly believe that SS told DD about the UV and did not want to have to go through with it and was arguing with DD on what to do. He is continually trying to get information from Draco as to what he is doing. 7. ??? - ***IMO***: SS and HP will have a run in, and HP will be suprised at the outcome Let me know what you think, or if I missed any of SS's signs of ESE/DM (Dumbledore's Man) ~Amanda~Trying to make sense of everything From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Thu Jan 12 20:34:33 2006 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Thu, 12 Jan 2006 20:34:33 -0000 Subject: Who is she talking about? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146325 greenfirespike quoted from a recent interview: > >>>In the seventh and final Harry Potter book there will be deaths of > both goodies and baddies. She was talking to her husband, Neil, the > other day, after she had just written the death of one particular > character. "He shuddered. 'Oh, don't do that,' he said to me, but of > course I did." And with one swirl of her pen, millions of children > will weep or rejoice. "Neil is the only person I can talk to about > what happens because he instantly forgets," she says, laughing.<<< > > Do we have a guess who this is? My guess is a 'goodie', and that > would be Neville. SSSusan: I think Neville's a good guess, greenfirespike, but I can certainly think of others which would cause Dr. Neil to shudder as well. Ron? Hermione? *One* of the twins? Molly or Arthur? Hagrid? Lupin (for us non-ESE!Lupiners)? Remember that the "millions of children will weep or rejoice" comment is the interviewer's comment, not JKR's herself. She went on to say that Neil's the only one she can tell "because he instantly forgets." I know she was probably joshing, but would he forget if it was someone as important as one of the trio? I'm thinking not. Or maybe that's just Wishful Thinking talking me out of the possibility. Siriusly Snapey Susan From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Thu Jan 12 20:45:28 2006 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Thu, 12 Jan 2006 20:45:28 -0000 Subject: ESE! Snape or not WAS: Re: Cheating In-Reply-To: <20060112184938.37493.qmail@web30805.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146326 > Amanda: > > IMO: I do not think that Snape is ESE. Of all the wizards, DD is the one whose word I would trust the most. I believe he would take care in taking an 'ex-Death Eater' under his wing. If SS used occlumency, DD would know. DD can tell when a memory has been modified/etc. In addition, in every book, we see SS coming to the aid of Harry/DD. Alla: Well, even though personally I am rooting and hoping that ESE!Snape will emerge, I doubt that this is what is going to happen. Although I will keep hoping till book 7 will come out. :-) Nevertheless, I absolutely think that OFH!Snape IS a strong possibility. At least half of your examples could be interpreted as evidence for OFH!Snape too. IMO anyways. Amanda: > 1. SS/PS - Countercurse on Quirrell's magic on HP during the game. Helping DD protect the stone with potions obstacle. Alla: If Snape indeed values Dumbledore protection and does not want to go to Azkaban, it seems perfectly reasonable to me that it makes no sense to him to kill Harry right under Dumbledore nose OR despite Snape's allegiances, Life Debt Magic came into place (as Neri so brilliantly postulated in so much detail) and Snape felt compelled to get rid of the debt to James by saving Harry. In that scenario Snape can be good or evil and still wanting to get rid of the Debt in any event, IMO. Amanda: > 2. CoS - HP used SS's potions for making 'polyjuice' potion. Alla: They used ingredients, not potions, no? And I don't remember Snape WILLINGLY giving them those ingredients. :-) Amanda: > 3. PoA - Standing in front of HP/RW/HG putting himself at risk of werewolf!Lupin. I have always found it interesting how SS just happened to be in the area HP was in to catch him wondering the HUGE castle at night, Lupin right behind him Alla: But that is in the movie, not in the book. Amanda: > 4. GoF - Was right beside DD and ready for helping when HP was with Moody!Crouch Jr. with truth potion ready. Alla: Because Dumbledore ordered him too? Don't get me wrong,Snape showing Fudge the Dark Mark could be the evidence for Good!Snape and that is what I used to think too, but it also can mean nothing IMO. Amanda: > 5. OoP - Continually giving the Order information on LV. Alla: Isn't that interesting though that we don't know at all what information Snape was giving to the Order on Voldemort in OOP? Unless I forgot the canon references, if so could you please point me to it? But if we believe Snape in Spinner's End ( and I more often believe him than not depends on my mood :-)), he gave to Voldemort information about the Order members which lead to their deaths and while of course one can argue that Kreacher was a primary villain in engineering Sirius' death ( although I can totally see Snape going to Voldie or Malfoy independently), there is NOTHING in canon as far as I can remember to even suggest that anybody else can be guilty in the murder of Eveline Vance. Amanda: > 6. HBP - Why would SS have an argument w/ DD at the edge of the forbidden forest saying 'I want out'. I strongly believe that SS told DD about the UV and did not want to have to go through with it and was arguing with DD on what to do. He is continually trying to get information from Draco as to what he is doing. Alla: I don't have my HBP with me, but I thought Snape was saying that he does not want to do it anymore. There are multiple possibilities IMO what that was in reference too, including Snape not wanting to spy anymore, not wanting to watch over Harry anymore, etc, etc. Amanda: > 7. ??? - ***IMO***: SS and HP will have a run in, and HP will be surprised at the outcome Alla: Possibly, or Harry will not be surprised at all. :-) JMO, Alla From sweety12783 at yahoo.com Thu Jan 12 20:31:10 2006 From: sweety12783 at yahoo.com (Nina Baker) Date: Thu, 12 Jan 2006 12:31:10 -0800 (PST) Subject: Who dies in 7? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20060112203110.53579.qmail@web30209.mail.mud.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 146327 Sweety12783: I think that there will be a lot of deaths: 1. Professor McGongal: She will probably be made headmistress of Hogwarts and is one the closest people to Dumbledore. Since Dumbledore is dead, there will be no one to protect her. Plus, in book 5 the scene when she gets knock out in that fight involving Hagrid and Umbridge was a foreshadowing of whats to come. 2. The Weasley Family: Peter Pettigrew knows exactly where they are because he lived with them for 12 years. And since Dumbledore's dead, Voldermont is free to go after Harry and the first place they will look is the Burrow. And the Weasley may be tortured to get info on Harry and his whereabouts and then killed. 3. Professor Trelawney: Well he will try to extract the prophecy by force. In the end whe will be worthless and Voldermont will kill her. 4. Professor Snape: He can't exactly return to society because he killed someone. And because we do not know where his loyalty lies, he can either did trying to save Harry or die while supporting Voldermont. Either way he will die. 5. Lucius Malfoy: I can't explain why I think he will die but I just have a feeling that he will probably die in battle. (Maybe with Draco). 6. Bellatrix: Will be killed in battle. JKR said that many will die on both sides so it could be anyone, but these are the ones I think will die. Sweety12783 From bboyminn at yahoo.com Thu Jan 12 20:56:09 2006 From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Thu, 12 Jan 2006 20:56:09 -0000 Subject: The Wedding (was: Mrs. Figg ) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146328 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Ceridwen" wrote: > > bboyminn: > > Still, even the timing of an attack on the Dursleys doesn't > > quite seem right. Harry has a lot of plans for the summer, > >and I can't see him hanging around the Dursley for four whole > > weeks. I say two at best. > > > > Then he is off to Gordic's Hollow, back for the Weasley wedding, > > then off to his life, .... I really can't come up with a good > > excuse for this return, and I can't come up with any likelihood > > of a DE attack before Harry turns 17. > > Ceridwen: > Making a suggestion - I don't recall canon for when the > Weasley/Delacour wedding will be. .... If the wedding takes > place early in July, Harry would attend that first, then go to > the Dursleys for the last of his protection. Which may coincide > with his birthday. > > Objectively, I wouldn't hold a wedding so soon after the funeral > of a dear friend. ... > > Ceridwen. > bboyminn: On a point raised by others, whether Dumbledore is a close friend or not I don't think is that important. He was a beloved and respected member of the community and the Headmaster of many many many members of the wizard world. I'm sure they all had very fond feeling and deep respect for him even if they couldn't consider themselves friends. As far as the wedding, it looks like my preceived timeline is a little off. From what Ron said at the end of the book, it looks like the wedding will be very soon. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . HBP, Am Ed, HB . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 'We're with you whatever happens,' said Ron. 'But, mate, you're going to have to come round my mum and dad's house before we do anything else, even Godric's Hollow.' 'Why?' 'Bill and Fleur's wedding, remember?' Harry looked at him, startled; the idea that anything as normal as a wedding could still exist seemed incredible and yet wonderful. 'Yeah, we shouldn't miss that,' he said finally. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . I can't imagine Harry thinking he has to stay at the Dursley's until he turns 17. He simply has to return long enough to re-enforce the protective enchantment at the Dursley. I still say 2 weeks a best. I also can't imagine the wedding happening immediately after school is out, again I suspect 2 weeks of planning and preparation. Though, I admit, I'm making many assumptions here, but they seem reasonable. So, we have Dursleys, Wedding, Godrics Hollow, and then off to his life for Harry. I still don't see any reason for Harry to return to the Dursley after he has left. I guess one simple explanation is that Harry is traveling light, and must return to the Dursley's to gather ALL his possessions before moving on to where ever he will move to. Personally, as distastefull as it is, I suspect Harry will end up at 12 Grimmauld Place. Still since Ron and Hermione can use magic, I don't see moving all his possessions to the Burrow as that big a task. Oh yes, there is one additional task that I haven't accounted for; Harry and Ron getting their Apparation License, but that is just a one day adventure. It could happen anytime. Woo-Hoo! Only two more years and we'll know all the answers. Steve/bboyminn From ldorman at researchbydesign.com Thu Jan 12 21:03:16 2006 From: ldorman at researchbydesign.com (kibakianakaya) Date: Thu, 12 Jan 2006 21:03:16 -0000 Subject: Wandless Harry and his powers In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146329 Harry Flashman wrote: > >SNIP> > Also, JKR is really stretching the bounds of credulity by making Harry > appear to be a very ordinary wizard (even incapable of doing > non-verbal spells, and useless at occlumency and leglimency), yet one > who is supposed to have been marked as an equal by Voldemort. > Maybe Harry will love Voldemort into death? Wouldnt that be great? I > think Harry would have to show a lot more power (even with his ability > to love) to finally take on and best Voldemort. But this does not > appear to be very likely as JKR seems determined to keep Harry as an > average wizard at best. > Lana here: Harry has some greater than average powers, such as Patronus-casting at an early age, talent in DADA that he shows in leading the DA, and the ability to cast a shield charm so powerful in knocks Snape backwards during DADA class (HBP.) He is the only one in his class able to resist Imperious, and his will is strong enough to overcome Voldemort's will in the graveyard scene. But the point is that *defense* against Dark Arts is only part of defeating Voldemort. Harry can defend himself for a millenium without harming Voldie. He needs to do something other than defend himself to defeat the Dark Lord. That is where "the power the Dark Lord knows not" comes into play. The "power the Dark Lord knows not" is related to love - but there are a number of ways that Jo might go in having that power aid Harry. It is obviously going to be something far deeper than just "loving someone to death." Some ways in which "love" may play a role include: 1. Harry can inspire and call upon those who love him to help. 2. Voldemort can't abide being in the presence of pure love, which gives Harry some sort of control over him (analagous to what happened when Voldie possessed Harry in the MoM) 3. Harry travels beneath the Veil and learns information from his parents, Sirius and/or Dumbledore that could help him further. Most likely Jo will come up with a specific scenario that surprises us. But in the end, we should not underestimate Harry either. He is resourceful, strong-willed, and, as Jo mentioned, has learned a lot of which he is not even aware at the end of HBP. I wouldn't want to have Harry as an enemy. Lana From ornawn at 013.net Thu Jan 12 21:15:49 2006 From: ornawn at 013.net (ornadv) Date: Thu, 12 Jan 2006 21:15:49 -0000 Subject: Spies, Lies and Self fullfilling prophecies Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146330 Orna: That's a very thought-out and possible theory, and I admit that my main motive for trying to poke holes in it, is that I really like Lupin and what he stands for IMO very much, and wouldn't like him to end ESE!. >Pippin: >Pettigrew could hardly have continued to spy on the Order after >being outed as the Secret Keeper, or faking his own death, so why >frame Sirius at all? Orna: Because he was a very good wizard, who would certainly try to avenge the Potter's murder. And Peter was unable to duel with him directly. >Pippin: >Voldemort has a long history of framing people for his crimes, and >the crimes of his supporters. A double bluff would certainly not be >beyond his cunning. Orna: Agree. If your theory is correct ? Voldemort would probably act as you said. But when would he have the opportunity to frame Wormtail ? he was Voldivapor at the time Sirius and Wormtail met? >Pippin: >Wormtail the Spy, OTOH, is supposed to have killed twelve people >with a single spell. This contradicts not only much that we're told >about Peter but much else we know about magic. Eye contact is >supposed to be important, all the spells we've seen are directional, >yet Wormtail is supposed to have cast, with a wand held behind >his back, a spell that killed everyone within twenty feet of himself >yet left him unharmed. ::raises eyebrows:: Orna: I agree that this part is troubling me. But that's my explanation: He blew apart the street ? that might have acted like an explosion and killed the people. Or made enough mayhem to allow for further AKes. In GoF Wormtail is quite capable of AKing Cedric without so much as turning a hair. Another thought I had ? killing is a very crude action, and killers are sometimes very "simple" butchers ? not very sophisticated or talented, but just that ? killers. Since Peter seems to be hungry for power, he might have learned the AK, just as he seems to have mastered his animagus transformation ? he does it quite efficiently and quickly in PoA. Another thought ? the marauders didn't teach him AK, that's sure. So he must have got some training from DE before Voldemort's fall. As it is he wasn't suspected for it, so he might as well have done other things. >Pippin: >Murder tears the soul, even Voldemort can't remain untouched by it, >yet after supposedly killing twelve people, Pettigrew lives twelve >years in peace and certainly doesn't lose any sleep over his >supposed crime. Orna: Voldemort sleeps very peacefully, as much as his past killings are concerned, unless he is pained by his future plans. And I think Wormtail soul is teared ? there don't seem to be left in him any human feelings like dignity, love, interests (chess, music, anything). He is just Voldemort's whining rat-servant, with some trace of his life-dept still flickering in him. >Pippin: >Anyone spying on Dumbledore would need to be good at occlumency, >yet there's no hint that Peter has any such ability. His emotions >always seem very close to the surface. Both Voldemort and Harry can >read him like a book. Orna: Don't know - it's a problem. Unless he just didn't count as a suspect. He is a not much noticed fellow. But he should be nervous, and it didn't show. Or it did show, and was thought to reflect his natural cowardice. >Pippin: >Wormtail the Spy supposedly captured Bertha Jorkins and brought >her straight to Voldemort, but how could Petttigrew have done that? >He was still searching for Voldemort when he arrived at the inn >where he found Bertha, wasn't he? How did he know where to take her? Orna: Perhaps he knew then, that he was close enough to Voldemort, so he could risk looking for him with her around. If he thought he was close to Voldemort, he would be very happy to arrive with a welcome- present. It is in his character, IMO. Actually, Voldemort in GoF says that Bertha's capture was an unexpected brainwave from Wormtail. >Pippin: >Wormtail the Spy was supposedly a fanatical follower of Lord >Voldemort,expecting to become second in command once Voldemort was >in power, but Peter is shown cooperating only reluctantly. Orna: I suppose that Wormtail could be a spy like Draco did his mission ? he volunteered happily and enthusiastic and then was threatened to go on. In HBP I think we have the opportunity to see through Draco and Narcissa the way DE might work ? it's very strong that they have no opportunity for second thoughts, and that it might turn into a very reluctantly done job ? although at the same time a job done with all their powers ? being frightened to death as it is. Another part of Wormtail's reluctance might have to do with the life dept, which acts as a conflicting force within him. Orna From kchuplis at alltel.net Thu Jan 12 21:22:14 2006 From: kchuplis at alltel.net (Karen) Date: Thu, 12 Jan 2006 15:22:14 -0600 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Who dies in 7? References: <20060112203110.53579.qmail@web30209.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <001001c617be$4255c460$b301010a@ConsolidatedTelephone.local> No: HPFGUIDX 146331 >JKR said that many will die on both sides so it could be anyone, but these are the >ones I think will die. >Sweety12783 Many? Really, she's said "many"? So is this going to be like some kind of Revenger's Tragedy with one or two folk left standing? Hmmm. That would be a little disappointing to me. kchuplis [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From hickengruendler at yahoo.de Thu Jan 12 21:50:23 2006 From: hickengruendler at yahoo.de (hickengruendler) Date: Thu, 12 Jan 2006 21:50:23 -0000 Subject: Who dies in 7? In-Reply-To: <20060112203110.53579.qmail@web30209.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146332 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Nina Baker wrote: > > Sweety12783: > > I think that there will be a lot of deaths: > > 1. Professor McGongal: She will probably be made headmistress of Hogwarts and is one the closest people to Dumbledore. Since Dumbledore is dead, there will be no one to protect her. Plus, in book 5 the scene when she gets knock out in that fight involving Hagrid and Umbridge was a foreshadowing of whats to come. Hickengruendler: IMO, Professor McGonagall is pretty capable of protecting herself. Admittingly, she was knocked down in OotP, but by people she thought to be defenders of the law, who attacked her without even a warning. If she knows, what to expect from her enemies, I think she will made their task as difficult as possible. Besides, I can't see the point of Hogwarts loosing yet another headmaster. > > 2. The Weasley Family: Peter Pettigrew knows exactly where they are because he lived with them for 12 years. And since Dumbledore's dead, Voldermont is free to go after Harry and the first place they will look is the Burrow. And the Weasley may be tortured to get info on Harry and his whereabouts and then killed. Hickengruendler: Maybe. But there's no way JKR will kill off *all* Weasleys. She said all her killings are there for a reason, and killing off the whole Weasley family just for shock (or even to show how gruesome the Death Eaters are) is not an acceptable reason to me. But she might kill off one Weasley member. Most of them don't live in the Burrow anymore, anyway. And if it is attacked while Arthur is at work, Ron at the Horcrux hunt and Ginny in Hogwarts (which I think will reopen), than only Molly would be home and maybe at biggest risk. The reason why I don't think so, is because it would be too redudant to kill off yet another parental figure for Harry. > > 3. Professor Trelawney: Well he will try to extract the prophecy by force. In the end whe will be worthless and Voldermont will kill her. Hickengruendler: I agree that she will die, but not before she made her third prophecy. I'm sad, because I like her quite a bit, but she is pretty high on my "people, who won't see the epilogue" list. IMO she is the character, who nedded Dumbledore's protectioon the most. McG is capable to defend herself, but Sybill doesn't seem to. > 4. Professor Snape: He can't exactly return to society because he killed someone. And because we do not know where his loyalty lies, he can either did trying to save Harry or die while supporting Voldermont. Either way he will die. Hickengruendler: Yes, I agree. Goodbye Severus. But I think he will die saving Harry. Sadly, I fear for Neville. I can see him doing something rash after learning of the prophecy and/ or dieing heroically. My only hope is, that I still think he's the most likely candidate for the classmate, who becomes a teacher, otherwise I think he's at risk. From luckdragon64 at yahoo.ca Thu Jan 12 21:54:47 2006 From: luckdragon64 at yahoo.ca (Bee Chase) Date: Thu, 12 Jan 2006 16:54:47 -0500 (EST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Who is she talking about? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20060112215447.25720.qmail@web53308.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 146333 greenfirespike quoted from a recent interview: > >>>In the seventh and final Harry Potter book there will be deaths of > both goodies and baddies. She was talking to her husband, Neil, the > other day, after she had just written the death of one particular > character. "He shuddered. 'Oh, don't do that,' he said to me, but of > course I did." And with one swirl of her pen, millions of children > will weep or rejoice. "Neil is the only person I can talk to about > what happens because he instantly forgets," she says, laughing.<<< > > Do we have a guess who this is? My guess is a 'goodie', and that > would be Neville. SSSusan: I think Neville's a good guess, greenfirespike, but I can certainly think of others which would cause Dr. Neil to shudder as well. Ron? Hermione? *One* of the twins? Molly or Arthur? Hagrid? Lupin (for us non-ESE!Lupiners)? Luckdragon: Oh, no! It can't possibly be Neville. For one thing it would just be too cruel to poor Alice Longbottom after the suffering she has already gone through to lose Neville whom it seems is the only one she interacts with in some small way. Also Neville has just begun to come out of his shell in the past couple of books. He is starting to show promise in becoming a person of character and a productive member of the herbologist community. Why kill him off after that. If LV goes after Neville I think Trevor will take the AK for him. The character I think will go for sure is Seamus. His mother has been such a doubting Thomas it would certainly turn her thinking around if it was revealed that her dear son's killer was LV and his goons. I bet the fighting Irish would come out in full force to support Harry after Seamus's demise. __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From starjackson1 at yahoo.com Thu Jan 12 21:05:27 2006 From: starjackson1 at yahoo.com (starjackson1) Date: Thu, 12 Jan 2006 21:05:27 -0000 Subject: Half blood prince disappointing In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146334 Harry Flashman wrote: > What a disappointing book! I think JKR spent to many pages on unneeded > details. Often I got the impression that JKR was simply trying to fill pages. > So much more plot could have been developed and loose ends started to > be tied. I can't see how the final book in the series can be any less > than a 1000 pages with all the loose ends that need to be tied in > order to properly close the plots and bring the series to a > satisfactory end. > > Harry's training with DD could have been more than just learning about Voldemorts horcruxes. > Anyway the next book will have to have a lot more action, and plot > development than HBP had. > Starjackson1: I have to say that HBP was my least favorite book in the HP series. It was a bit slow in the beginning. However, character and plot development, and richness in detail about characters' feelings,etc. is something we have all come to expect from Ms. Rolling. There were a couple of chapters in the book I just loved. I would have to assume that men probably would tired of the romantic entanglements of Ron,Hermione, Harry, and Ginny. But I enjoyed them! I also thought DD did impart some important information to Harry, about Voldemort's past, and the identity of the Horcruxes (what objects they were). DD explanation of the nature of the prophecy and Harry' greatest strengh (love) were important issues for Harry to understand if he was every going to sucessfully fight Voldemort. Starjackson1. From rdas at facstaff.wisc.edu Thu Jan 12 22:21:34 2006 From: rdas at facstaff.wisc.edu (susanbones2003) Date: Thu, 12 Jan 2006 22:21:34 -0000 Subject: Wandless Harry and his powers In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146335 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "kibakianakaya" wrote: > >> > Lana here: > Harry has some greater than average powers, such as Patronus- casting > at an early age, talent in DADA that he shows in leading the DA, and > the ability to cast a shield charm so powerful in knocks Snape > backwards during DADA class (HBP.) He is the only one in his class > able to resist Imperious, and his will is strong enough to overcome > Voldemort's will in the graveyard scene. SNIPPAGE HERE > The "power the Dark Lord knows not" is related to love - but there > are a number of ways that Jo might go in having that power aid > Harry. It is obviously going to be something far deeper than > just "loving someone to death." Some ways in which "love" may play > a role include: > 1. Harry can inspire and call upon those who love him to help. > 2. Voldemort can't abide being in the presence of pure love, which > gives Harry some sort of control over him (analagous to what > happened when Voldie possessed Harry in the MoM) > 3. Harry travels beneath the Veil and learns information from his > parents, Sirius and/or Dumbledore that could help him further. You are one of a number of people who's mentioned going through, behind, under or around the world beyond the veil. Is this speculation or do we have some canon or JKR reference to the veil being parted and letting a live person through? I know we can hear them behind there, I know the veil is very thin at times, but where do we get the idea that someone currently alive can go through, communicate and presumably come back? Thanks! Jen D, running off to read the Ministry chapters in OOTP... > From starjackson1 at yahoo.com Thu Jan 12 20:50:29 2006 From: starjackson1 at yahoo.com (starjackson1) Date: Thu, 12 Jan 2006 20:50:29 -0000 Subject: Wandless Harry and his powers - Wait a minute! In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146336 Harry Flashman wrote: > Also, JKR is really stretching the bounds of credulity by making Harry > appear to be a very ordinary wizard (even incapable of doing > non-verbal spells, and useless at occlumency and leglimency), yet one > who is supposed to have been marked as an equal by Voldemort. Maybe Harry will love Voldemort into death? Wouldn't that be great? I > think Harry would have to show a lot more power (even with his ability > to love) to finally take on and best Voldemort. But this does not > appear to be very likely as JKR seems determined to keep Harry as an > average wizard at best. > Starjackson1: You surely must remember the fact that Harry earned an "Exceeds Expectations" in his Defense Against the Dark Arts O.W.L.S, and he taught the subject to his fellow students in the DA! In addition to all THAT - Harry stunned his examination teachers, not to mention the Wizard Court - with the fact that he can produce a full, corporeal Patronus! In fact, his examination teacher had heard of this fact and asked him to produce the Patronus in his examination. All of this information was in Order of the Pheonix. All of this information points to the fact that Harry is a very gifted wizard - more gifted that wizards his own age normally are. So Harry does indeed stand out amoung his peers! Hermione (someone help me here) said in one of the HP books that Harry was a great Wizard. Harry may not be the greatest herbologist or potions maker, but he is a great wizard with exceptional talent. Your memory seems to be very selective in this regard. Starjackson1. From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Thu Jan 12 22:54:16 2006 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Thu, 12 Jan 2006 22:54:16 -0000 Subject: ESE! Snape or not (Was: Re: Cheating) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146337 Amanda wrote: > > > > IMO: I do not think that Snape is ESE. Of all the wizards, DD is the one whose word I would trust the most. I believe he would take care in taking an 'ex-Death Eater' under his wing. If SS used occlumency, DD would know. DD can tell when a memory has been modified/etc. In addition, in every book, we see SS coming to the aid of Harry/DD. Carol responds: Although I'm not sure about the modified memory portion of your statement (after all, the memory Slughorn gave DD to put in the Pensieve was a deliberate but sloppy patch job, whereas Snape appaarently uses unaltered memories that support his story to conceal any memories or emotions that would reveal a lie), I agree with your overall position that Snape is DDM!, that DD was right to trust him, and that he has helped DD or Harry in every book. Like Alla, though, I'm not sure that the examples you've chosen are the best possible support for this position. And as she points out, there's more than a bit of movie contamination in your PoA example. (See, Alla? I understand where you're coming from, even though I'm *not* looking forward to ESE!Snape and can't understand why anyone would *want him to be evil.) > Alla wrote: At least half of [Amanda's] examples could be interpreted as evidence for OFH!Snape too. Carol responds: This point I reluctantly concede. There's no question that JKR has presented Snape ambiguously throughout the series, even in HBP. I can't imagine him being ESE! if ESE! means loyal to Voldemort (Voldie's man through and through), but OFH!Snape is a real possibility (though I prefer DDM!). > > Amanda: > > 1. SS/PS - Countercurse on Quirrell's magic on HP during the > game. Helping DD protect the stone with potions obstacle. > Alla: > If Snape indeed values Dumbledore protection and does not want to go to Azkaban, it seems perfectly reasonable to me that it makes no sense to him to kill Harry right under Dumbledore nose OR despite Snape's allegiances, Life Debt Magic came into place and Snape felt compelled to get rid of the debt to James by saving Harry. In that scenario Snape can be good or evil and still wanting to get rid of the Debt in any event, IMO. Carol responds: There's a difference between letting Harry from a fall (not protecting him by using the countercurse) and actually killing him, as Quirrell was trying to do. But for whatever reason, Snape did save Harry from falling, keeping him in the air and holding onto his broom until Hermione broke both his and Quirrell's eye contact and concentration. That he did so may or may not be attributable to the life debt (which may or may not have been paid). But Snape could have done what every other teacher present did--watch in (real or feigned) horror as Harry struggled with the hexed broom. Snape alone knew who was hexing the broom and took action to thwart him. As Quirrell himself says near the end of the book, Snape did indeed dislike Harry, but he didn't want him to die. The reason could be simply a desire to pay off the life debt, but it could also be his knowledge of the first part of the Prophecy. Harry is "the One" and Snape, if he's DDM! (or anti-Voldemort for any reason) needs him to be alive. Snape also attempted to keep the "unworthy" Quirrell away from the Stone and was injured in the process. Just supplying the potions, riddle, and curtains of fire to guard the Stone is not in itself evidence of loyalty to Dumbledore; even Quirrell contributed to the Stone's protection (or pretended to) by supplying a troll, but Snape anticipated Quirrell's move on Halloween and prevented him from using the troll diversion to go after the stone. Later he questions "where [Quirrell's] loyalties lie." The implication of these words is that, contrary to what he told Bella (and presumably LV), he knew or suspected that Quirrell was loyal to LV whereas he, Snape, was loyal to Dumbledore. I don't think Snape would have used these words if he thought Quirrell was after the Stone for himself. And since we now know that Snape is a Legilimens, he may even have known that LV was in Quirrell's head. But being a superb Occlumens, he could later convince LV that he thought it was only "unworthy Quirrell" (who had the teaching post Snape wanted) who was after the Stone. > > Amanda: > > 2. CoS - HP used SS's potions for making 'polyjuice' potion. > > Alla: > > They used ingredients, not potions, no? And I don't remember Snape > WILLINGLY giving them those ingredients. :-) Carol responds: True, Alla. This is an instance of Hermione listening in Potions class and knowing what the potion does and where to find it in the library. I don't think Snape deliberately mentioned it so that HRH would steal Potions ingredients from his supply cupboard to spy on Draco. But he *did* teach the entire duelling club the Expelliarmus spell, enabling Harry to use it later against Lockhart in this book and Voldemort in GoF, among numerous other instances. (IMO, this is a case of Snape showing Lockhart and the students what a real DADA teacher should do, but Lockhart is hopeless.) At any rate, Expelliarmus, like the bezoar Snape mentions in SS/PS, proves valuable to Harry. Snape also points out to Lockhart that the time to show his expertise has come, setting up the opportunity for Harry and Ron to go to Lockhart for help and enter the Chamber themselves. Granted, he didn't do it deliberately, but I doubt they would have gone to rescue Ginny if they hadn't overheard this conversation. (BTW, Snape's knuckles whitening as he grasps the back of his chair is evidence of his concern for Ginny.) > > Amanda: > > 3. PoA - Standing in front of HP/RW/HG putting himself at risk of werewolf!Lupin. I have always found it interesting how SS just > happened to be in the area HP was in to catch him wondering the HUGE > castle at night, Lupin right behind him > > Alla: > > But that is in the movie, not in the book. Carol: Alla's right. What really happens is that Lupin sees Sirius pulling Ron and Pettigrew on the Marauder's Map and rushes off without his Wolfsbane Potion. Snape is bringing the potion, sees Lupin on the map running along the tunnel (which Ron tells us in GoF shows only the grounds, not Hogsmeade--I can find the quote for you if you want it, Alla) to the Shrieking Shack. So what Snape runs off to do is to catch the werewolf and the "murderer." When he finds Harry's invisibility cloak at the entrance to the tunnel, he knows that Harry is there, too. IMO, he sees this as yet another opportunity to save Harry and maybe get some recognition as a hero. Things don't work out quite as planned, but at least he gets to conjure up stretchers and take HRH and Sirius back to the castle before the Dementors or the werewolf returns. He also tries unsccessfully to keep Harry out of Hogsmeade, and therefore safe both from Dementors and the "murderer," throughout the book. > > Amanda: > > 4. GoF - Was right beside DD and ready for helping when HP was > with Moody!Crouch Jr. with truth potion ready. > > Alla: > Because Dumbledore ordered him too? Don't get me wrong,Snape showing Fudge the Dark Mark could be the evidence for Good!Snape and that is what I used to think too, but it also can mean nothing IMO. Carol responds: I don't think we can say that showing Fudge the Dark Mark meant nothing. It was proof that he had been a Death Eater, and to show it to Fudge as proof that Voldemort has indeed returned was an act of remarkable courage. Taken along with his appearance in the Foe Glass along with DD and McG and with his going off at the end of the book to face Voldemort as he and DD have clearly planned ("If you are ready, if you are prepared") is IMO, our best evidence that Snape is indeed DDM! And, yes, he did help to thwart and expose Fake!Moody at the end of the book (possibly casting a Stunning spell along with DD to break the door down), fetching and (IIRC) administering the Veritaserum, and fetching Winky (such a dignified job for our Severus!), so Amanda is right that he helps to save Harry at the end of this book as well as several others. > > Amanda: > > 5. OoP - Continually giving the Order information on LV. > > Alla: > Isn't that interesting though that we don't know at all what information Snape was giving to the Order on Voldemort in OOP? Unless I forgot the canon references, if so could you please point me to it? Carol responds: Well, he gives a report that Harry and friends aren't allowed to hear at 12 GP and the other Order members are excited about it both before and after the meeting, so he must have showed them something interesting, probably related to the building plan that Bill vanished after the meeting. And also, of course, he told them that Harry thought Sirius had been captured and later sent them to the MoM to rescue him--pretty important information, I'd say, and definitely helping to save Harry's and his friends' lives. Alla: > But if we believe Snape in Spinner's End he gave to Voldemort information about the Order members which lead to their deaths and there is NOTHING in canon as far as I can remember to even suggest that anybody else can be guilty in the murder of Eveline Vance. Carol responds: Snape does not claim to have killed her, which he certainly would have done if he were the actual murderer trying to prove to Bella that he's loyal to Voldemort. He only tells Bella, after carefully establishing that LV is not on speaking terms with her, that he contributed information leading to her death. Nothing in canon suggests that he actually murdered her, and the bit about supplying information can neither be proved or disproved at this point. You think it's the truth, and that could be (we know that as a double agent, he has to supply *some* useful information or risk being killed), but it's also possible that the reference to Emmeline Vance is a lie that Bella is in no position to disprove. At any rate, EV has nothing to do with Amanda's argument that "Snape comes to the aid of Harry in every book." > > > Amanda: > > 6. HBP - Why would SS have an argument w/ DD at the edge of the forbidden forest saying 'I want out'. I strongly believe that SS told DD about the UV and did not want to have to go through with it and was arguing with DD on what to do. He is continually trying to get information from Draco as to what he is doing. > > Alla: > I don't have my HBP with me, but I thought Snape was saying that he does not want to do it anymore. There are multiple possibilities IMO > what that was in reference too, including Snape not wanting to spy > anymore, not wanting to watch over Harry anymore, etc, etc. Carol responds: According to Hagrid, who gives only paraphrased snippets of a partially overheard argument, Snape does tell DD that he doesn't want to do something anymore and that DD takes too much for granted. DD tells him that he promised to do it and that's that. I agree that this conversation can be interpreted any number of ways (it probably relates somehow to the Unbearable, I mean Unbreakable, Vow). I don't think it can possibly relate to not wanting to watch *Harry* any more, since Snape chooses to give him Saturday detentions for the rest of the year after the Sectumsempra curse (Harry is right under his eye and can't possibly get into trouble during these detentions). It *could* have something to do with not wanting to watch *Draco* any more. (Snape has already followed him around, put Crabbe and Goyle in detention, and finally confronted Draco only to find him resentful, suspicious, and uncooperative. IMO, Snape doesn't want to watch Draco any more because he's afraid he'll find out what he's up to in the RoM and be forced by the UV to help him.) But the argument in the forest is probably the most ambiguous piece of evidence we have regarding Snape's loyalties. The best that can be said is that if Snape were trying to fool DD into thinking that he's loyal, he wouldn't openly defy him and try to get out of a promise. He'd be much more cunning and subtle, as Snape is quite capable of doing. But to return to the point. Snape saves at least three lives (DD's, Katie's and Draco's) in this book, and it's only thanks to his bezoar lesson, reinforced by his old Potions book, that Harry is able to save Ron. He also gets the DEs (and Draco) out of Hogwarts and saves harry from a Crucio. True, there's that little matter of what happened on the tower, but the evidence for DDM! Snape is also present throughout the book. And DD's trust in Snape has reached a level almost of dependency; he even becomes angry when Harry refuses to believe that Snape is on their side. Clearly, Dumbledore knew something that Harry doesn't and we don't, either. If only he were alive to tell us! > > > Amanda: > > 7. ??? - ***IMO***: SS and HP will have a run in, and HP will be > surprised at the outcome > > Alla: > > Possibly, or Harry will not be surprised at all. :-) > Carol: Do you like chocolate frogs with your crow, Alla? ;-) (I think I'll take fire whiskey with mine. I'll need it if Snape turns out to be evil. I have a huge emotional and intellectual investment in him and I don't want him to betray me.) BTW, I have a question for everyone who uses the term ESE! Do we all agree that it means "in league with Voldemort" (not necessarily on the fanatical level of Bellatrix or Barty Jr., but still a Voldemort supporter like Lucius Malfoy)? Or is someone (like Lucius Malfoy or Peter Pettigrew) who has his own agenda for joining or allying himself/herself with Voldemort considered to be OFH! Or do these terms apply only to people whose loyalties are in question (chiefly Snape and possibly Lupin)? I wonder if some of the disagreements within the group are really just a difference in how we're defining these terms. For me, ESE!Snape is loyal to Voldemort and always has been (like Bellatrix or Barty Jr.), and that just seems absurd. OFH!Snape would be loyal to one or the other as long as there was something in it for him, but he would have no emotional stake in his loyalty and would betray either one of them if he could do so with impunity (rather like our dear friend, Peter Pettigrew). That doesn't really fit him, either, because whether he admits it to himself or not, Snape is a highly emotional man. He just likes to control or conceal his emotions through Occlumency, or use them if they're useful to him. But sometimes they slip out of his control, at least when he's around Harry. I doubt that he slips up in that way around Voldemort. DDM!Snape, though not a naturally good person like, say, Cedric Diggory, is genuinely loyal to Dumbledore. He may be angry and resentful on occasion, like a son with a father, but he genuinely admires and respects Dumbledore, maybe even loves him. And for DDM!Snape to be forced by circumstances he tried and failed to control (the DADA curse, the UV, the presence of DEs on the Tower) to kill Dumbledore is tragic and compelling in a way that ESE! or OFH!Snape can't match. He also, to me, best fits the picture of the clever and talented yet insecure and possibly tormented Snape we see in the books, whose natural instincts are in conflict with his self-chosen loyalty to Dumbledore. Carol, hoping to be pleasantly surprised by (DDM!)Snape's survival in Book 7 From nonnymouse_X at hotmail.com Thu Jan 12 22:39:10 2006 From: nonnymouse_X at hotmail.com (ereshkigal_doom) Date: Thu, 12 Jan 2006 22:39:10 -0000 Subject: Who dies in 7? In-Reply-To: <001001c617be$4255c460$b301010a@ConsolidatedTelephone.local> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146338 kchuplis: > Many? Really, she's said "many"? So is this going to be like some > kind of Revenger's Tragedy with one or two folk left standing? Hmmm. > That would be a little disappointing to me. I can't believe that the series will suddenly turn into a blood bath. But I am sure that at least one major good guy (and some minor good guys) will die. Too many, and it would lose all impact. None, and the victory would be too easy. The two major characters who have died so far, Sirius and Dumbledore have both been father figures for Harry. I wonder if that theme will continue. If so, Hagrid and Arthur Weasly have fulfilled an almost parental role for Harry. Hagrid would be the saddest death, so I'd place my bets there. Another factor to consider is that the deaths in the series so far have been steadily ramping up in shock factor. Cedric was a fairly peripheral character. Sirius was important to Harry, but he hadn't had long to get to know him. Dumbledore was a constant in his life; always wise, powerful and reliable. The only way to up the shock factor from here is to actually kill one of the central trio; Harry, Hermione or Ron. However, this would rule out a happy ending, and I think the story is heading for a happy ending. I suspect there will be a death among more minor characters like Luna or Neville early on to highlight the seriousness of Harry's situation and the evil of his opponents. I imagine the last book will be quite unlucky for Death Eaters. In order to have a real victory, Voldemort and his followers must be totally neutralised. Otherwise, the victory will be incomplete. If Bellatrix, Lucius Malfoy, or Snape (if evil) survive, they could carry on their master's legacy. So I don't think they will live. Less self-willed Death Eaters could be neutralised by simply carting them off to Azkaban. Lucius Malfoy is doubly doomed because Draco's character arc seems to be pointing towards him working with the good guys. One thing that would be certain to stir Draco out of the comfortable assumptions he grew up with would be the loss of his idolised father at the hands of Voldemort. Even if Snape is good, I'm sure he will die, because he is so competent and powerful that having him at Harry's side in the final battle with Voldemort would make it a mite too easy. Also he seems a rather empty person - would he even want to survive? What does he live for, apart from making kids lives a misery? Maybe I am wrong and he'll be Headmaster of Hogwarts at the end of the series. If I was at Hogwarts, I think I'd be popular with Sybill Trelawney. I seem to have nominated just about everyone for death, including Harry Potter! :-) Sorry about the long post. Jan From BrwNeil at aol.com Thu Jan 12 23:17:02 2006 From: BrwNeil at aol.com (brwneil) Date: Thu, 12 Jan 2006 23:17:02 -0000 Subject: For ever or just till Book Seven-Ships Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146339 Has HBP really brought the shipping debates to a conclusion in the Harry Potter series or has JKR simply led us all to a false sense of finality? Don't get the wrong idea; I'm not suggesting for a minute that a wild turn around is about to take place and that suddenly the series will end up H/Hr. Honestly, I must admit that I find them better suited as a couple, but my head is still hurting from all the anvils it has come in contact with. Plus, the R/H fans would have JKR's head if she were to even consider such a dramatic change after the infamous interview. My question is, are these the final couplings or could changes still take place? No one bothered in the interview to ask Rowling if Harry and Ginny will get back together after the defeat of Voldemort or whether Ron and Hermione are a `till death do us part' couple. It seems everyone just assumes this to be the case. I hate to assume anything with JKR. On one hand they are only 16 years old in HBP, odds are against finding your sole mate at that age. On the other hand this is the wizarding world and unless you marry a Muggle, you choice options are rather limited. Molly and Arthur meet at Hogwarts and remained together, as did James and Lily. If I were reading a book by any other author, I'd immediately expect Harry to save the day and then return to the open arms of his sweetheart, Ginny, who would be waiting patiently for him. Of course, JKR isn't just any author and doesn't like the traditional endings. As an example, how often does the sidekick in a story end up with the heroine? Obviously any coupling depends on the character or characters surviving the series. With JKR, this is certainly not a given, but lets not even go there. Rather, first let's discuss Harry and Ginny. They obviously liked each other in HBP and for the two weeks that they were together seemed quite compatible. My biggest problem with Ginny is that JKR made her out to be a super groupie in both SS and CoS. She was in `love' with Harry before she ever even really met him. I have trouble seeing the point at which the infatuation turned to the real thing. Another problem is that although she claims to have never given up on Harry, she certainly had no problem snogging Dean at every opportunity. Ginny went quickly from one boy to another and then to Harry and didn't seem that awfully upset with him for breaking up with her. What has JKR done to show that this relationship was special and will last? We never got to see them interact in the book as we had Cho and Harry. I hate to see Harry get hurt, but if Rowling really wants to surprise us and at the same time add more torment to poor Harry's life, then Ginny won't be waiting for him. She will have gone on to a new boyfriend, perhaps several. Personally I'm into long shots and would like to see Ginny eventually wind up with Neville. Now lets discuss Ron and Hermione. I saw all the hints and I understand JKR wanting to be different and have the sidekick get the girl, but just deciding to do something in a book isn't enough; you need to get the readers to buy into it. I realize this isn't a romance novel, but how often in a book where romance is involved do you find such a heated debate as to who should be with whom. The writer's job is to make the readers buy into the relationships she is writing. I think here JKR failed. Even many people who saw the Ron/Hermione relationship coming will agree that they are not compatible. My own feeling is that Rowling got carried away with the bickering and just over did it. It was funny at times, but at other times became hurtful. As a reader who loves the character of Hermione, I often wanted to punch-out Ron. If Ron and Hermione are truly to be together and make it as a couple, one of them is going to have to change dramatically and honestly I hate to see either of them change that much. I like their differences, but feel those difference are too great for a lasting stable relationship. Then there is always the possibility that Rowling has no intention of their relationship lasting. They might simply be going to be the comic relief for book seven. Book seven is undoubtedly going to be the darkest and most serious of the series. In book six, I sorely missed the twins; the only amusement in the book came from Ron and his antics with Lavender. Without the twins' shananigins or Ron and Hermione fighting, there would seem to be little opportunity for laughs in book seven. I wonder at times if perhaps the two were only brought together so that we can enjoy the amusement of them fighting as a couple and then breaking up in book seven? Only Rowling knows for sure. A part of me hopes that all three of our favorite characters end up the series unattached. It would be like no ship winning and every ship winning and fanfiction writers could battle it out forever more. Only time will tell. I'd be interested in others' opinions as to whether they think H/G and R/H are final life long pairings. Neil From darkmatter30 at yahoo.com Thu Jan 12 23:31:31 2006 From: darkmatter30 at yahoo.com (Richard) Date: Thu, 12 Jan 2006 23:31:31 -0000 Subject: wonder who is guarding Azkaban now that the dementors are not there anymore. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146340 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "h2so3f" wrote: > > Corey the Unforgetable wrote: > "Hi members. Just posting to keep my hand in. So you guys won't > forget about me. Here is something I just thought of. Who is > guarding Azkaban now that the Dementors are no more? Is it some of > the left over Inferi or some other creatures or wizards or > witches? Just throwing it out and seeing what happens." > > CH3ed: > Hi Corey! Thanks for keep throwing in different stuff. > > I would say Azkaban is being guarded by MoM wizards now. As severe > as Scrimgeor seems I don't think he is into employing dark > creatures, especially now that Voldy is around being powerful again. > > CH3ed :O) Richard here: How about taking a radical tack or two here ... How could you make it so that prisoners would not even attempt escaping? I have a few ideas. We already know about Unbreakable Vows. Suppose you give a prisoner a choice of either extremely austere and stringent conditions, denied virtually all comforts and human contact, or agreeing to an Unbreakable Vow that would preclude any attempt to escape, acceptance of any aid in being freed, use of or attempts to use any magic to harm, impair or influence any other person or being, any attempts to circumvent the intent of the vow, and remaining within the confines of the prison for the entirety of one's term, barring explicit and fully legal parole, pardon or amnesty by the Ministry? Properly phrased, you could have a prisoner you could release free and able to care for him- or herself within the facility. We also know about memory charms. How about simply making some of your more problematic inmates forget how to do magic for the duration of a sentence? You'd still have to guard them, but they wouldn't be a significant flight danger, unless aided by outside parties. We know that it is possible to block certain kinds of magic within a specified area. So, in addition to normal cells, guards, etc., if you blocked ALL magic within some portion of the facility that contained problematic prisoners, those prisoners would have to rely upon their natural intelligence, logic and physical skills in order to escape ... and we were told in SS/PS that wizards generally are pretty poor at anything involving logic. There is the Fideleous (sp?) charm, too. You could use this to protect the exits of the prison, the cell blocks and the cells, while using assorted, more limited magical blocks, so that you could put a prisoner in a conventionally locked cell, and he or she would be unable to find the exit until informed by the secret keeper where the exit was. Personally, I think the first option is the most humane in most respects, even though there is the risk that an inmate might, through a slip in personal discipline, end up killing him- or herself. It is not cruel in any other sense, and would, over a longer sentence, tend to breed the habit of not even attempting to harm others. Such prisoners would be essentially harmless, largely trustworthy, and self-sufficient. They could keep their wands, even. Richard, who wishes such essentially humane solutions as the Unbreakble Vow for convicted criminals were a reality. From dobbyisdumbledore at yahoo.com Thu Jan 12 22:55:00 2006 From: dobbyisdumbledore at yahoo.com (dobbyisdumbledore) Date: Thu, 12 Jan 2006 22:55:00 -0000 Subject: R.A.B.'s Identity. Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146341 To me its fairly clear who R.A.B. is. Additionally I think it fairly certain where the locket of slytherin is. R.A.B. has had its fair share of suspects from Amelia Bones to multiple parties (Rodolphus And Bellitrix for example). But (as some here may know) the evidence for it being Regulus Black can be found in Cannon. Just not English versions. 1.) In Dutch, Black is translated as "Zwarts". The intials R.A.B. have been changed (in the dutch version of the book) to R.A.Z. 2.) In Norweigian, Black is translated as "Svarrt". The intials R.A.B. have been changed (in the Norweigen version of the book) to R.A.S. 3. None of the other suspect's names (Bones, Borgin etc.) have had the letter B changed. Only the Black name. It an unlikely concidence (then) that the initials change (in two seperate versions) to the change appropriate to the change of Black in each version. That said, if it was (indeed) Regulus... most have already deduced that it could very well be the necklace mentioned in passing that is in Grimmwald place. This makes sense as Regulus is of the house of Black. Many also speculate that many items (likely including the necklace) were "removed" by Mundungas fletcher. So with Mundungas in Azkaban prison... where might the necklace be now? When Harry first finds out that Mundungas has taken items from the House of Black he is with "the barkeep from the Hog's Head". (most would agree that this is Aberforth Dumbledore) and when Aberforth sees Harry he "pulls his cloak up around his neck and hurries off". Now, why would Rowling casually mention that he would pull the cloak around his neck? And the important item we are now discussing is a locket. Concidence? Most here know that there are very few of those in Rowling's world. dobbyisdumbledore From dobbyisdumbledore at yahoo.com Thu Jan 12 23:31:05 2006 From: dobbyisdumbledore at yahoo.com (dobbyisdumbledore) Date: Thu, 12 Jan 2006 23:31:05 -0000 Subject: Voldemort "intentionally" makes Harry a Horcrux? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146342 I know, I know... Why would he "do that". Well, because its BRILLIANT. As far as Voldemort is concerned (through Snape's telling of a partial phrophecy) Harry is the child that is destined to potentially stop him. What better course of action (then) to attempt to 'cover all bases'? By Killing James, Voldemort has the sufficent murder to create his Horcrux. The Horcrux would then put on (into?) the baby Potter. Voldemort would THEN attempt to kill Harry. If he kills him, he loses 1 7th of his soul... but also rids himself of the phrophecy child. This is a reasonable cost. However, what 'if' something goes wrong? By putting a horcrux into the being that was destined (potentiall) to stop him... Voldemort ENSURES that he lives on (due to his Horcrux exsisting in the only person that could stop him). In such a fashion, Voldemort covers his bases. A.) Lose 1/7th of his soul but kill the child. B.) If something goes wrong and he (voldemort) "dies", and the child lives, a part of Voldemort lives as long as the child does. To Voldemort, this is the perfect solution to the phrophecy (the part he knows anyhow.) Now, what goes wrong that night? Why does Voldemort "fail"? How is his killing curse "returned to sender" (if you will). As we now know, it is Severus Snape that delivered the details (partially anyhow) to Voldemort. I believe that he had an agenda in doing so, and his agenda (and an accompanied deal struck with Voldemort) stemmed to be the Voldie's downfall. Many consider that Snape probably had a "thing" for Lilly. How agonizing (remember what Slughorn says about obsessive love) to see your most hated person (James) with the person you "love" (Lilly). I believe that Snape gave Voldemort the information of the Prophecy (Peter gives the location). But in so doing... made Voldemort take the unbreakable vow that he would not harm Lilly. In so doing, Severus rids the situation of James (and possibly the child) while making sure Lilly is safe. So what goes wrong? Voldmort (and followers?) go to Godric's Hallow (the Potter's hiding place) and kills James (the murder sufficent for creating the Horcrux. He then places the Horcrux in Harry. He then prepares to use the killing curse on baby Harry. When he does so, Lilly gets in the way of the killing curse (sacrifices herself out of love for her child) and the result is that he kills her... but it also rebounds or he simply "dies" as a result of a broken vow that Voldemort has made to Snape. Becuase he promised that Lilly would NOT be harmed, when she is (regardless of intent) killed, it has serious impact for Voldemort. Remember that Voldemort tells Harry that "your mother needn't have died". This would explain why that is. It would also (Dumbledore's proclamation that Lilly's act of love protected Harry). It would also explain Snape's changing of his ways. And why he was heartbroken by what he had done. dobbyisdumbledore From gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk Thu Jan 12 23:48:50 2006 From: gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk (Geoff Bannister) Date: Thu, 12 Jan 2006 23:48:50 -0000 Subject: R.A.B.'s Identity. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146343 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "dobbyisdumbledore" wrote: dobbyisdumbledore: > To me its fairly clear who R.A.B. is. > R.A.B. has had its fair share of suspects from Amelia Bones to > multiple parties (Rodolphus And Bellitrix for example). > > But (as some here may know) the evidence for it being Regulus Black > can be found in Cannon. Just not English versions. Geoff: This has been tackled several times already on the group. The most recent occasion (I think) was a longish thread entitled "Who is RAB again" which began at message 140815. From darkmatter30 at yahoo.com Thu Jan 12 23:54:40 2006 From: darkmatter30 at yahoo.com (Richard) Date: Thu, 12 Jan 2006 23:54:40 -0000 Subject: Voldemort "intentionally" makes Harry a Horcrux? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146344 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "dobbyisdumbledore" wrote: > > I know, I know... > > Why would he "do that". > > Well, because its BRILLIANT. > > As far as Voldemort is concerned (through Snape's telling of a partial > phrophecy) Harry is the child that is destined to potentially stop him. > > What better course of action (then) to attempt to 'cover all bases'? > > By Killing James, Voldemort has the sufficent murder to create his > Horcrux. The Horcrux would then put on (into?) the baby Potter. > > Voldemort would THEN attempt to kill Harry. If he kills him, he loses > 1 7th of his soul... but also rids himself of the phrophecy child. > This is a reasonable cost. > > However, what 'if' something goes wrong? By putting a horcrux into the > being that was destined (potentiall) to stop him... Voldemort ENSURES > that he lives on (due to his Horcrux exsisting in the only person that > could stop him). > > In such a fashion, Voldemort covers his bases. > > A.) Lose 1/7th of his soul but kill the child. > B.) If something goes wrong and he (voldemort) "dies", and the child > lives, a part of Voldemort lives as long as the child does. > > To Voldemort, this is the perfect solution to the phrophecy (the part > he knows anyhow.) > > Now, what goes wrong that night? > > Why does Voldemort "fail"? How is his killing curse "returned to > sender" (if you will). > > As we now know, it is Severus Snape that delivered the details > (partially anyhow) to Voldemort. > > I believe that he had an agenda in doing so, and his agenda (and an > accompanied deal struck with Voldemort) stemmed to be the Voldie's > downfall. > > Many consider that Snape probably had a "thing" for Lilly. > > How agonizing (remember what Slughorn says about obsessive love) to > see your most hated person (James) with the person you "love" (Lilly). > > I believe that Snape gave Voldemort the information of the Prophecy > (Peter gives the location). But in so doing... made Voldemort take the > unbreakable vow that he would not harm Lilly. > > In so doing, Severus rids the situation of James (and possibly the > child) while making sure Lilly is safe. > > So what goes wrong? Voldmort (and followers?) go to Godric's Hallow > (the Potter's hiding place) and kills James (the murder sufficent for > creating the Horcrux. He then places the Horcrux in Harry. > > He then prepares to use the killing curse on baby Harry. When he does > so, Lilly gets in the way of the killing curse (sacrifices herself out > of love for her child) and the result is that he kills her... but it > also rebounds or he simply "dies" as a result of a broken vow that > Voldemort has made to Snape. Becuase he promised that Lilly would NOT > be harmed, when she is (regardless of intent) killed, it has serious > impact for Voldemort. > > Remember that Voldemort tells Harry that "your mother needn't have > died". This would explain why that is. It would also (Dumbledore's > proclamation that Lilly's act of love protected Harry). > > It would also explain Snape's changing of his ways. And why he was > heartbroken by what he had done. > > > dobbyisdumbledore > Richard here: There's a hole in your argument where you have Voldemort under an Unbreakable Vow not to harm Lilly, in that it would have meant that in explicitly killing Lilly (whom he gave the chance to step aside) would have invoked the Vow and thus death. (A curious question is whether the Unbreakable Vow holds despite use of a horcrux. Being a voluntary act, is it binding upon the severed fragments of the soul?) Rather, Voldemort himself says he killed Lilly when she wouldn't step aside, and thus failed to kill Harry for having forgotten the "old" magic that sacrifice invoked. Voldemort discuss this in some detail in the graveyard scene in GoF. Also, I think it a stretch to think that Snape would be able to coerce Voldemort into agreeing to an Unbreakable Vow. First, Voldemort would not suffer the indignity, nor the cheek from someone he viewed as a servant. Second, I doubt that he would agree to anything the consequence of which, if violated, is death. Third, I doubt that he would know for certain whether his horcruxes would protect him from the effects of the violating the Unbreakable Vow. But that's all just my opinion ... Richard, who think Voldemort is quite understandable, even if far more contemptible than understandable. From kelleyaynn at yahoo.com Fri Jan 13 00:18:08 2006 From: kelleyaynn at yahoo.com (kelleyaynn) Date: Fri, 13 Jan 2006 00:18:08 -0000 Subject: Harry Vanquishing LV without killing him. Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146345 Kelleyaynn: Several people have been discussing the idea that Harry need not kill Voldemort to vaquish him. I really like that idea, except that the prophecy doesn't appear to support it. There is a line in the prophecy that says: "and either must die at the hand of the other for neither can live while the other survives." (OoTP pg 841 US) I personally think it would be a great way to end the story if Harry could destroy Voldemort by his power of love, but I don't know how that can fit in with the prophecy line above. Can anyone else figure it out? Unless..... I read somewhere that JKR has said by the end of book 7, everyone will know that she is a Christian. That statement has always led me to believe that Harry may die (or appear to die), only to have him come back (perhaps through the veil?). Maybe Voldy will kill Harry, but somehow his ability to love will give him the power to come back, which will in some way destroy Voldemort. That's kind of stretching things though. Kelleyaynn From bartl at sprynet.com Fri Jan 13 00:46:54 2006 From: bartl at sprynet.com (Bart Lidofsky) Date: Thu, 12 Jan 2006 19:46:54 -0500 Subject: The Strange Attitude of Voldemort on the Killing of Lily Potter In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <43C6F87E.8010704@sprynet.com> No: HPFGUIDX 146346 Richard wrote: > soul?) Rather, Voldemort himself says he killed Lilly when she > wouldn't step aside, and thus failed to kill Harry for having > forgotten the "old" magic that sacrifice invoked. Voldemort discuss > this in some detail in the graveyard scene in GoF. Bart: One of the mysteries in the Harry Potter novels is why Voldemort offered to spare Lily Potter. Certainly, she had proven to be a thorn in his side, and he did not have any apparent reason not to kill her. Motives have been given (including by me), but, in our discussions, a new possibility has occurred to me. This is based on two not unreasonable assumptions: 1) Voldemort fully expected Lily to take his offer. 2) Voldemort had something to gain if she did. Given the theme of the power of love and Voldemort's rejection of it, it would make literary sense if it was connected. Given this logical house of cards (albeit pretty sturdy cards), what Voldemort was looking to do was proving that love could be overcome, in this case by fear of death. I might go further to say that, if Lily took his offer, he would have his hooks in her in some way, shape, or form (the elusive "life debt"?). Bart From bartl at sprynet.com Fri Jan 13 00:48:20 2006 From: bartl at sprynet.com (Bart Lidofsky) Date: Thu, 12 Jan 2006 19:48:20 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Harry Vanquishing LV without killing him. In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <43C6F8D4.2090509@sprynet.com> No: HPFGUIDX 146347 kelleyaynn wrote: > Several people have been discussing the idea that Harry need not > kill Voldemort to vaquish him. I really like that idea, except that > the prophecy doesn't appear to support it. There is a line in the > prophecy that says: "and either must die at the hand of the other > for neither can live while the other survives." (OoTP pg 841 US) Which, of course, has already been violated. Both of them survive, and both of them are living. Bart Lidofsky, 1974, maybe taking this a MITE too literally. From luckdragon64 at yahoo.ca Fri Jan 13 00:50:22 2006 From: luckdragon64 at yahoo.ca (Bee Chase) Date: Thu, 12 Jan 2006 19:50:22 -0500 (EST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Harry Vanquishing LV without killing him. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20060113005022.41524.qmail@web53305.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 146348 Kelleyaynn: Several people have been discussing the idea that Harry need not kill Voldemort to vaquish him. I really like that idea, except that the prophecy doesn't appear to support it. There is a line in the prophecy that says: "and either must die at the hand of the other for neither can live while the other survives." (OoTP pg 841 US) Luckdragon: Before his powers and his supporters LV was simply Tom Riddle. If LV were to lose either his magical ability or if everyone turned on him in unity and no longer feared him he would again become Tom Riddle. This way LV is "vanquished" without dying, and because Harry would be behind this either by reducing LV's powers through the destruction of the horcruxes or by convincing all of the magical community to turn against LV then the prophecy is met. LV would be dead, Tom Riddle would be a muggle ,if he doesn't end his own life, and Harry could get on with Life. Does this make sense. --------------------------------- Find your next car at Yahoo! Canada Autos [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From PenapartElf at aol.com Fri Jan 13 01:14:58 2006 From: PenapartElf at aol.com (PenapartElf at aol.com) Date: Thu, 12 Jan 2006 20:14:58 EST Subject: Reminder - chap. disc. of HBP8 (Snape Victorious) Message-ID: <7f.6da5727d.30f85912@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 146349 Since the dissection of HBP ch. 8 (Snape Victorious) is now in the offing, we would like to suggest that everyone who is interested in participating meaningfully *reread* this chapter and refresh your memory of canon. Look for the post from Sherry in the week of January 16th! The discussion schedule is at http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/database Just click on the "HPfGU HBP Chapter Discussions" table. Thanks and enjoy! From zarleycat at sbcglobal.net Fri Jan 13 02:17:05 2006 From: zarleycat at sbcglobal.net (kiricat4001) Date: Fri, 13 Jan 2006 02:17:05 -0000 Subject: Subject: Who dies in 7? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146350 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Tonks" wrote: > Tonks here: > > Well let's look at who Harry cares about the most. > > Ginny > Ron > Hermione > Hagrid > Molly > Arthur > Lupin > McGonagall > > Any and all on this list could be a goner by the end. > > At least one Weasley, maybe more will have to go. Marianne: Oh, yes. I think a slew of Weasleys could be offed, if for no other reason than that JKR has said that one has to be ruthles when writing these books. I think Charlie could easily be collateral damage simply because we've only had peripheral contact with him - just enough to have a sense of who he is, but not enough to become attached to him. But, of course his death would resonate throughout the Weasley family, so he's good cannon fodder. I can see one of the twins being knocked off, too. Tonks: > The person killed off early could be McGonagall. That would throw > the school into a spin again. And I think that McGonagall has > knowledge about DD and Snape that will be lost by her death. She may > be the only other one to know the truth about Snape and what side he > is on and why. This way Snape will have to contact Harry himself. Marianne: Really? McGonagall seemed as shocked as anyone in the Hospital scene when Harry tells what he perceives of Snape's betrayal. I don't think she was privy to any discussions between DD and Snape. Nor do I think she was privy to whatever reason DD had for accepting Snape's story of remorse and trusting him to have renounced the DEs once and for all. I think DD, for whatever reason, handled Snape exclusively on his own, and now it's going to bite everyone in the butt. If McGonagall knew something, even if it was a secret, I think she would have immediately stopped the speculation during the Hospital scene about how traitorous Snape was. She could easily have done so without explaining herself. Tonks: > My guess is that this is going to be bad, really, really bad. It is > a "war" after all. We have to put Harry in a very bad place > emotionally. So maybe all of his friends will have to die. Somehow, > Harry will be all alone. Harry will be suffering a great deal of > grief unbearable grief. Marianne: I don't think Harry is destined to fight through all of this alone. Harry is already dealing with grief. Which is not to say that some others close to him might die, but to slaughter everyone around him seems a bit like overkill to me. Tonks: > There are others options too: Let's say that Harry is going to live. > In that case Ron and Hermione will have to die. If Harry is the one > to die, maybe Ginny will go with him. This is keeping the shipping > together. I don't know if we have to do that, but if there is to be > a happy ending I think that somehow Ron and Hermione and Harry and > Ginny have to end up together on the same side of the veil. Marianne: I don't know - it seems too constructed for me. I'm not sure I understand your either/or position that if Harry lives, Ron and Hermione must die. Nor do I understand why the ships must stay together, ie, if Harry lives, then of course Ginny lives, too. Why couldn't one half of each couple die? Tonks: > Bad guys dying: > Draco - This would cause the Malfoys to possible change sides. We > would see sister against sister. And what will happen to Lucius? > He is too rich of a character to let disappear in Azkaban. Maybe we > will see that he really does have some "feeling" for his son. > Certainly the death of Draco would give a lot of fuel to some > serious action on the Dark side. Marianne: Well, boo-hoo for the Malfoys. Sorry, but if Draco dies, I'll have a hard time mustering a whole lot of sympathy for poor, bereaved Narcissa and Lucius. These are people who had not the slightest sympathy or empathy that we've seen for other families who have lost loved ones to Voldemort's deprivations. If their son buys the farm in Book 7 and that suddenly causes the two of them to grow consciences, I can't say I'd welcome them with open arms to the side of good. Tonks: > Snape, of course will have to die at some point in the book. Marianne: Please, please, please... Tonks: > All in all as death goes, I think that JKR will have to (sad to > say), top what she has done up to now. That means that book 7 will > be worse (emotionally) for all of us than any other book up to now. > And it will have to be far worse for poor Harry. Whether he ends up > alive or dead in the end, it is going to be a soul wrenching > experience for us all, and Harry most of all. But somehow, someway, > she will, by the grace of God, bring it all to a good end. Marianne: I wonder if she will not somehow leave an opening for evil to survive. Not that I want that - some of my comments above to the contrary. But, it seems to me that one thing JKR has hinted at is that good and evil are locked in a continuous struggle. DD gets rid of Grindewald. And, lo and behold, Tom Riddle shows up and morphs into Voldemort. Harry may very well defeat Vmort in some fashion. But, that does not wipe evil from the world. How would people feel if, in the final confrontation, Vmort as we know him is obviously defeated either by his actual death or by a negation of his power, but somehow JKR leaves the door open to another growth of evil in years to come? Let's say Pettigrew helps Harry defeat Vmort, but escapes his own justice, and, when he disappears, there is some hint that he's carrying knowledge or power or some other talisman that indicates he could come back in ten or twenty or fifty years as a new threat? Would people find that an unsatisfying ending? Or would they see it as an acknowledgement that evil exists, and, as long as there are humans inhabiting the earth, it will continue to exist... Marianne All Hail the Captain, #11, New York Rangers From quick_silver71 at yahoo.ca Fri Jan 13 02:38:17 2006 From: quick_silver71 at yahoo.ca (quick_silver71) Date: Fri, 13 Jan 2006 02:38:17 -0000 Subject: Harry Vanquishing LV without killing him. In-Reply-To: <20060113005022.41524.qmail@web53305.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146351 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Bee Chase wrote: > Luckdragon: > Before his powers and his supporters LV was simply Tom Riddle. If >LV were to lose either his magical ability or if everyone turned on >him in unity and no longer feared him he would again become Tom >Riddle. This way LV is "vanquished" without dying, and because Harry >would be behind this either by reducing LV's powers through the >destruction of the horcruxes or by convincing all of the magical >community to turn against LV then the prophecy is met. LV would be >dead, Tom Riddle would be a muggle ,if he doesn't end his own life, >and Harry could get on with Life. Does this make sense. I disagree with this. I believe that Tom Riddle and Voldemort are one and the same. Saying that Harry only has to destroy Voldemort and not "Tom Riddle" is a cop out...Riddle is Voldemort, Riddle made the choices, took the risks, that made "Voldemort" possible. Even the phrase "I am Lord Voldemort" is simply an rearranging of Tom Riddle's name. Voldemort is not some demon processing the body of Tom Riddle...he literally is Tom Riddle. And even if Tom Riddle was somehow "seperate" from Voldemort his true body would have died 15 years ago at Godric's Hollow. Quick_Silver From stevejjen at earthlink.net Fri Jan 13 02:52:42 2006 From: stevejjen at earthlink.net (Jen Reese) Date: Fri, 13 Jan 2006 02:52:42 -0000 Subject: The Wedding (was: Mrs. Figg ) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146352 Steve/bboyminn: > I can't imagine Harry thinking he has to stay at the Dursley's > until he turns 17. He simply has to return long enough to re- > enforce the protective enchantment at the Dursley. I still say 2 > weeks a best. Jen: I think you're right. Dumbledore requested that the Dursleys allow Harry to return 'once more, to this house, before his seventeenth birthday, which will ensure that the protection continues until that time.' (Chap. 3) Harry heard that comment and probably understands he doesn't have to stay until his birthday. Speculatively I think Harry might be held up by Petunia. Petunia should be glad to see the back of Harry and be done with the whole mess, but since she knows more about the WW than she's letting on, she may also know Voldemort is not a rational person who will leave them alone just because Harry is gone. If her family received protection in return for keeping Harry, or if she fears Voldemort might come looking for Harry once his protection ends, I could see her crumbling and finally revealing whatever information she's been hiding. Like letting Harry read Dumbledore's letter(s) and possibly giving him information about Lily or some item that belonged to her. Personally, I would like to see her beg for Harry's help... Steve: > So, we have Dursleys, Wedding, Godrics Hollow, and then off to his > life for Harry. I still don't see any reason for Harry to return to > the Dursley after he has left. Jen: The only reason I could see him returning is if the Dursleys are targeted for some reason. Or Mrs. Figg, she's actually a more likely person for Voldemort to torture for information. Especially since she was outed at the MOM hearing to be living in the Dursley neighborhood. I think her going to that hearing was doubly brave because she was off the radar of the magical community until that hearing. > Woo-Hoo! Only two more years and we'll know all the answers. Maybe a year and a half now? Summer 2007 is my prediction. Especially if JKR is already writing death scenes. :( Jen From lowndes at bigpond.net.au Fri Jan 13 01:55:37 2006 From: lowndes at bigpond.net.au (Marg McKay-Lowndes) Date: Fri, 13 Jan 2006 11:55:37 +1000 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Humanity, Kant, Caricatures, and Draco (was Re: Real child abuse) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <000001c617e4$74280540$0100000a@lan> No: HPFGUIDX 146354 Magda: > > And FWIW, "pureblood wizardry" isn't in and of itself evil. [MML] here: IMO belief in the superiority of pureblood wizards and witches over others is evil, in much the same way that the Nazis believed in the superiority of the Aryan race over the others, notably Jews. These beliefs had evil repercussions. I know we are talking about the books here, but did anyone else find it interesting that Ralph Fiennes played both Amon Goeth in Schindler's List, as well as Voldemort in GoF. But I digress. THe point that Geoff made about sinnners repenting is interesting. I think this is what Dumbledore is trying to get Malfoy to do on top of the tower. Dumbledore, unlike Harry, is able to forgive and have compassion for those who have gone over to the dark side. This reminds me of Jesus being able to forgive even those who crucified him, compared with the disciples who found it difficult to do so. I believe that only when Harry develops Dumbledore's ability to love his enemies, will he really win out over the force of evil. So far, the angry Harry is bent on revenge. He's got to get over that. Cheers MML who is new at this so please forgive any vagueness. From GAP5685 at AOL.com Fri Jan 13 00:53:20 2006 From: GAP5685 at AOL.com (gwen_of_the_oaks) Date: Fri, 13 Jan 2006 00:53:20 -0000 Subject: Voldemort "intentionally" makes Harry a Horcrux? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146355 dobbyisdumbledore wrote: . > > However, what 'if' something goes wrong? By putting a horcrux into the being that was destined (potentiall) to stop him... Voldemort ENSURES that he lives on (due to his Horcrux exsisting in the only person that could stop him). > > In such a fashion, Voldemort covers his bases. > Now Gwen: I agree with your line of thinking here. I had a theory along similar lines after reading HPB. Since we knew that Harry a scar, and AK leaves no mark of any kind (as we've been told over and over again) it seemed safe to assume that LV didn't use AK on Harry. After learning of Horcruxes, I assumed that just as you suggest, LV tries to cover all bases by making Harry a Horcrux. It is brilliant. Now, I am no believer in the "Snape loved Lily" theory. LV tells Lily to step aside because he doesnt need to kill her, actually she needs to stay alive to take care of baby Harry once he's Horcruxed. But she wont step aside, sacrifices herself, gives Harry old magic protection of love which LV does not expect. Just as he could not touch Harry in PS/SS, so his soul piece cannot stay inside Harry. He tries to Horcrux Harry, but the soul-bit cannot stay in him because of all the love. It leaves him and when it does, it makes the scar. Think of stone in Slytherin's ring after the soul-bit was removed - it had a big jagged crack. Sound like Harry's scar? This exploding soul-bit and botched soul-partitioning is what vaporizes LV and destroys the house. Now he did momentarily have a bit of his soul in Harry, which is where the transfer of abilities and the mind-link comes from. But Harry is not a Horcrux because it just wouldn't "take". I believe that JKR even said on her website or an interview that Harry (or Ginny, either)was not a Horcrux. So he could not have made Harry a Horcrux and then tried to kill him, because Harry cannot be a Horcrux now. Problems with this theory? The biggest contradiction comes from the end of GOF, when LV himself says that he tried to kill Harry (GOF Am. Hardcover pg 652) and that the curse was deflected and rebounded onto him (pg 653). It can be argued that he says it because he doesnt want the DE's to know what his real intentions were, but thats iffy. However later, when the wand is going through the prior incantatem there was no spell between the Shadow of Bertha Jorkins and the Shadow of Lily (pg 666-667). Like the wand emitting "screams" for the crucio curses, surely the AK sent at Harry would have regurgitated in some form? Even as a flash of light? So there is that indication that maybe AK was never used on baby Harry. Gwen (Who likes the theory, but was not thrilled enough with it to develop it further) From alesiaglfyn at juno.com Fri Jan 13 02:49:07 2006 From: alesiaglfyn at juno.com (Bonnie Harvey/ Alesia Gillefalyn) Date: Fri, 13 Jan 2006 02:49:07 GMT Subject: Muggles we know was: Magic late in Life Message-ID: <20060112.184933.13667.15206@webmail46.lax.untd.com> No: HPFGUIDX 146356 An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed... Name: not available URL: From luckdragon64 at yahoo.ca Fri Jan 13 03:37:55 2006 From: luckdragon64 at yahoo.ca (Bee Chase) Date: Thu, 12 Jan 2006 22:37:55 -0500 (EST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Harry Vanquishing LV without killing him. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20060113033755.83367.qmail@web53301.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 146358 > Luckdragon: > Before his powers and his supporters LV was simply Tom Riddle. If >LV were to lose either his magical ability or if everyone turned on >him in unity and no longer feared him he would again become Tom >Riddle. This way LV is "vanquished" without dying, and because Harry >would be behind this either by reducing LV's powers through the >destruction of the horcruxes or by convincing all of the magical >community to turn against LV then the prophecy is met. LV would be >dead, Tom Riddle would be a muggle ,if he doesn't end his own life, >and Harry could get on with Life. Does this make sense. Quick_Silver: I disagree with this. I believe that Tom Riddle and Voldemort are one and the same. Saying that Harry only has to destroy Voldemort and not "Tom Riddle" is a cop out...Riddle is Voldemort, Riddle made the choices, took the risks, that made "Voldemort" possible. Even the phrase "I am Lord Voldemort" is simply an rearranging of Tom Riddle's name. Voldemort is not some demon processing the body of Tom Riddle...he literally is Tom Riddle. And even if Tom Riddle was somehow "seperate" from Voldemort his true body would have died 15 years ago at Godric's Hollow. Luckdragon: Yes! Tom Riddle & Lord Voldemort are the same being, however the prophecy was worded very carefully by the writer and only refers to LV under his assumed name and not his birth name. IMO LV is only powerful because of what he represents and because of the misguided souls who support him, take these away from him and he no longer becomes a threat to Harry. The dark lord will exist no more, but the shell of what he once was(Tom Riddle) may remain to live out his days a powerless, souless man. --------------------------------- Find your next car at Yahoo! Canada Autos [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From gav_fiji at yahoo.com Fri Jan 13 03:38:14 2006 From: gav_fiji at yahoo.com (Goddlefrood) Date: Fri, 13 Jan 2006 03:38:14 -0000 Subject: Voldemort "intentionally" makes Harry a Horcrux? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146359 > dobbyisdumbledore wrote: > So what goes wrong? Voldmort (and followers?) go to Godric's Hallow > (the Potter's hiding place) and kills James (the murder sufficent for > creating the Horcrux. He then places the Horcrux in Harry. Having read and absorbed your theory I have to say it is rather unlikely. It falls down simply on only the following point, and if this question can be satisfactorily answered then my view might be modified. The question is "Why would Lily allow Voldemort to place a Horcrux in Harry?". I am assuming that Lily knows the implications of a Horcrux residing in her son by posing this. It would also have to be accepted that Lily left Harry alone for some time while she knew the family was under attack, which is inordinately improbable. The original theory for those who have not fully read it assumes that LV kills James, places a Horcrux in Harry, allows Lily to live and then kills Harry. Goddlefrood From gav_fiji at yahoo.com Fri Jan 13 03:42:08 2006 From: gav_fiji at yahoo.com (Goddlefrood) Date: Fri, 13 Jan 2006 03:42:08 -0000 Subject: Wording of the Prophecy (WAS Re: Harry Vanquishing LV without killing him.) In-Reply-To: <20060113033755.83367.qmail@web53301.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146360 > Luckdragon: > Yes! Tom Riddle & Lord Voldemort are the same being, however the prophecy was worded very carefully by the writer and only refers to LV under his assumed name and not his birth name. Quite simply it does not. It states that the one with the power to defeat the Dark Lord approaches. Even though this adds little to the discussion the quoted writer was so wrong that this had to be pointed out. Goddlefrood From luckdragon64 at yahoo.ca Fri Jan 13 04:09:48 2006 From: luckdragon64 at yahoo.ca (Luckdragon) Date: Fri, 13 Jan 2006 04:09:48 -0000 Subject: July 31 2007 Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146361 Luckdragon: Sorry, no canon for this date folks, just a guess. I won't be at work, having booked the day off in advance. I won't even make it to the checkout before I know. I will grab the first copy I see and turn swiftly to the last page and start scanning the words before me. I will then thumb through the chapter titles glancing here and there for clues as I work my way to the front of the store. When I hand the cashier my money I will either bear a huge grin or be shedding tears, and I will already know if he is "The Boy who lived" or not. I will know if "scar" truly is the last word of book seven and why. I will probably even know of a "goodie", or "baddie" or two who have departed the wizarding world. I may know which "ships" will endure, which direction survivors lives may be heading, and who or what "Trevor the toad" really is. Then I will hug my treasured book as I hurry home to spend the next day or two reading, and rereading. By the time I have finished I will know: Why Harry having his mothers eyes is significant. Why Lily did not have to die. The significance of the broken 2 way mirror. If DD is truly dead. What and where all the Horcruxes were. If Draco was bitten by a werewolf. If Harry will be the DADA teacher in book 7. Who will use magic later in life. Which Weasley will die. Who might be a vampire. If Snape is ESE, has a son, loved Lily, etc. Who was at Godric's Hollow. If Peter will kill Fenrir Greyback with his silver hand. Why Jo had to word the prophecy so carefully, and what it truly means. and oh so much more. Is anyone else planning on reading the last page first? What questions do you want answered above all others. From luckdragon64 at yahoo.ca Fri Jan 13 04:15:18 2006 From: luckdragon64 at yahoo.ca (Bee Chase) Date: Thu, 12 Jan 2006 23:15:18 -0500 (EST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Wording of the Prophecy (WAS Re: Harry Vanquishing LV without killing him.) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20060113041518.82952.qmail@web53309.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 146362 Goddlefrood wrote: > Luckdragon: > Yes! Tom Riddle & Lord Voldemort are the same being, however the prophecy was worded very carefully by the writer and only refers to LV under his assumed name and not his birth name. Goddlefrood Quite simply it does not. It states that the one with the power to defeat the Dark Lord approaches. Even though this adds little to the discussion the quoted writer was so wrong that this had to be pointed out. Luckdragon: Sorry! Lord Voldemort/Dark Lord. I humbly stand corrected. --------------------------------- Find your next car at Yahoo! Canada Autos [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From stevejjen at earthlink.net Fri Jan 13 04:26:15 2006 From: stevejjen at earthlink.net (Jen Reese) Date: Fri, 13 Jan 2006 04:26:15 -0000 Subject: Squibs have genes to do magic? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146363 Thinking about Mrs. Figg or Filch doing spontaneous magic later in life made me wonder if that's possible. I thought the whole point of a Squib is that he/she doesn't have magical genes; Even immersing themselves in the magical world as Filch does, how could they suddenly perform magic? Magic is supposedly due to a dominant gene, so it seems like it would be equivalent to changing your eye-color, but then I have a mental block about genetics. The problem is I honestly can't think of anyone else who could qualify for magic later in life and surprise Harry other than either Filch or Figg (since the Dursleys are out). Both have made such a big deal about not being able to perform magic. I think the fact Filch has actually tried to use a wand if he did the Kwikspell course probably tips the scales in his favor. He wouldn't be a Squib though, but latently magical and just lived his life thinking he was a Squib. Jen, knowing she's splitting hairs . From h2so3f at yahoo.com Fri Jan 13 04:32:41 2006 From: h2so3f at yahoo.com (h2so3f) Date: Fri, 13 Jan 2006 04:32:41 -0000 Subject: Harry Vanquishing LV without killing him. In-Reply-To: <20060113033755.83367.qmail@web53301.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146364 CH3ed: I'd rather have Nagini be the last horcrux left and acts like a true snake in the end by biting the own master, LV. Assuming that Nagini's venom is fatal to LV when injected instead of taken orally, this will kill LV's body (his home soul is again ripped from his body). Then Harry can kill Nagini (an animal, afterall...and not a human), which then should either kill LV's home soul for good, or leave it vulnerable to be destroyed...maybe by a hungry dementor? Or both the home soul and the last horcruxed soul could both die together when Nagini bites LV? CH3ed watched a lot of skaters spinning around in St. Louis tonight and is citing that as his excuse for not thinking very straight at the moment. ;O) From kchuplis at alltel.net Fri Jan 13 04:41:40 2006 From: kchuplis at alltel.net (Karen) Date: Thu, 12 Jan 2006 22:41:40 -0600 Subject: [HPforGrownups] July 31 2007 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146365 On Thursday, January 12, 2006, at 10:09 PM, Luckdragon wrote: > Luckdragon: > Is anyone else planning on reading the last page first? > What questions do you want answered above all others. > > Egad no! Do you really? But that spoils the fun! kchuplis From djklaugh at comcast.net Fri Jan 13 04:43:24 2006 From: djklaugh at comcast.net (Deb) Date: Fri, 13 Jan 2006 04:43:24 -0000 Subject: Voldie and the aging process (Was: Half-Blood Prince disappointing) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146366 "justcarol67" wrote: (sadly snipping Carol's excellent post) . So Harry *will* have to kill or otherwise > destroy LV, body *and* soul, after he's destroyed the Horcruxes that > keep LV's soul from leaving the earth and passing beyond the Veil. > > Carol, noting that if Voldie could be defeated by old age, there'd be > no need for the Chosen One and we'd have no story I agree that Harry must find some way to vanquish LV and destroy his capacity to do magic and evil .... I am just not convinced Harry *has to* kill him. One scenario might be ... Harry and friends destroy all of the Horcruxes and then find a way to pursuade a Dementor to administer *the Kiss* to LV. His last soul fragment is gone... along with his memory and - apparantly from hints given in canon - his ability to do magic. In this manner Harry does not have to kill - thereby avoiding the splitting of his own soul yet still reducing LV to Muggle!Mort. Just how one could pursuade a Dementor to *Kiss* LV is beyond my capacity to imagine cuz it is such a disgusting image (IMO)... though I have also wondered what would happen if a Dementor *Kissed* LV before all the Horcruxes were destroyed... would the Dementor only get that bit of soul left in LV's current body? Or would the power of the *Kiss* be so strong as to suck all of the soul bits from their hiding places and down the maw of the Dementor? Deb (djklaugh) who behind her facade of sweet little old(er) lady is actually rather ghoulish and mercenary From pegdigrazia at yahoo.com Thu Jan 12 16:33:42 2006 From: pegdigrazia at yahoo.com (Peg DiGrazia) Date: Thu, 12 Jan 2006 08:33:42 -0800 (PST) Subject: Muggles we have known In-Reply-To: <20060111120919.80920.qmail@web53203.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20060112163342.1342.qmail@web42209.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 146367 Bart: > Let's list all the non-magical people we have met: > > 1) Filch > 2) Mrs. Figg > 3) The Dursleys > 4) Dr. & Mrs. Granger > 5) Ummmm.... uh..... hmmmmm..... Finwitch: > 5) Masons (Dinner guests at Dursleys in CoS) > 6) Piers Poldiss&others of Draco's gang > 7) Mark Evans(&Parents?) > 8) the Railroad-staff member Harry asked about the Hogwarts Train > (who quite obviously had no idea...) > 9) The someone who asked what's going on when Harry crashed the > trolley (CoS) > 10) The poor Muggles in QWC being oblivated by Ministry and lifted > into air by DEs. > 11) The postman wondering about the stamps > 12) The Muggles met during Vernon's attempt to avoid the post for > Harry. > > Also - 7 of them saw Flying Car, and some Muggle saw Sirius >far off Hogwarts... maria8162001: >Let's not forget about the Muggle prime Minister in HBP Peg: And the muggles who started it all, the Riddles! From sherriola at earthlink.net Fri Jan 13 04:55:25 2006 From: sherriola at earthlink.net (Sherry Gomes) Date: Thu, 12 Jan 2006 20:55:25 -0800 Subject: [HPforGrownups] July 31 2007 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <007901c617fd$91cdb4a0$0400a8c0@pensive> No: HPFGUIDX 146368 > Luckdragon: > Is anyone else planning on reading the last page first? > What questions do you want answered above all others. > > sherry now: I'm actually thinking of getting to know someone from this list who lives in England or any other time zone that would get the book well in advance of me in the pacific time zone of the US. Then if that person will read the last page first and let me know if Harry lives or dies, I don't have to spend money if I don't like the ending. You can't listen to a little of an audio book before buying it. If Harry dies, i mean really dies, I'm not sure I want to read or own the book. but otherwise, and probably most likely, I will buy my audio book, have my braille book on order, go home and lock myself away from all TV radio or email, and read from page one to the end, hoping JKR gives me one more surprise, and maybe even a happy one for a change! As for story lines I'd like to see resolved, well, the importance or significance of the death of Sirius is one I'd like to see explained. After all, she did say there was something important about it, and i can't believe it's just to make Harry have to go on his journey alone. so, other than Harry destroying horcruxes, that's the big one I want explained. sherry From antoshachekhonte at yahoo.com Fri Jan 13 04:55:59 2006 From: antoshachekhonte at yahoo.com (antoshachekhonte) Date: Fri, 13 Jan 2006 04:55:59 -0000 Subject: Who is she talking about? In-Reply-To: <001a01c617b3$60e12330$b301010a@ConsolidatedTelephone.local> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146369 > kchuplis: > > You know, I really think poor Neville is just bound to bite it. Because he is so intricately involved in the prophecy, it just seems a necessary. I also think the fact that JKR nixed the Neville/Luna thing and it was pretty obvious that they were forming a bond, he just isn't going to make it. I only hope he goes usefully and bravely. I kind of wonder though if somehow LV becomes privy to the fact there was another baby and in a paranoic fit "just to make sure" and not knowing the rest of the prophecy, kills poor Neville. That could set up a pretty pychological gut punch for Harry, as well, in the "it's my fault again" mode. > > Antosha: You know, while I agree with this, the storyteller in me shrinks from the idea of Neville buying it. The kid's life has sucked from day one. Just like Harry, he grew up without parents and, while his grandmother isn't as bad as the Dursleys, she hasn't exactly been a font of unqualified affection. He's tortured, teased and has huge self-esteem problems that he's just coming to grips with. His death wouldn't be a tragedy, it would be sour and unsatisfying. Harry's death has the same problem, btw. Same with Ginny, who suffered at Tom Riddle's hand and hasn't been able to redeem that yet. Likewise, to a lesser degree, Luna's death would be all the sadness without any payoff. It'd be simply miserable and nihilistic. Mind, Sirius's death fairly sucked too. But there was a certain internal logic to it; it somehow seems worse if it's one of the kids whose life has been more challenging. The most logical candidate in my mind: Ron, if you think the chess game was symbolic. Hermione is another, since at some point, Harry is going to have to make do without her--just as we all knew that DD was going down in HBP, since Harry needed to finish things without the DD cavalry in reserve. Remus falls into the that-would-just-suck category. Tonks wouldn't have enough payoff--we barely know her, cool as she was in OotP. McGonagall is possible, but wouldn't cause widespread weeping, I think--and it'd be too much like DD's death. Of the older generation, the logical candidate is the one who has hardly served a dramatic purpose since GoF: Hagrid. He was Harry's introduction into the magical world, the threshold guardian, after a fashion, since he is, after all, the Keeper of Keys, and he is one of the people that Harry holds dearest. He owes Tom Riddle. You know (or at least we all hope) that Grawp is going to have some role to play in book seven (otherwise, please, let's all go and cut him out of the last two books, shall we?), and I'm sure Norbert will reappear. All of this makes me think that Hagrid will buy it somewhere around the middle of book seven--possibly an attack by LV on Hogwarts that pulls Harry, Ron and Hermione off of their quest and back into what was once their real world, and back into the company of the Second Trio: Neville, Luna and Ginny..... Well, I could spin that theory out for a while, but I'll do my Fermat routine and just say, Work it out for yourself. XD The point is that it wouldn't surprise me if Hagrid--or one of the Trio besides Harry--drops by the wayside midway through the book. From maria8162001 at yahoo.com Thu Jan 12 16:44:47 2006 From: maria8162001 at yahoo.com (Maria Vaerewijck) Date: Thu, 12 Jan 2006 08:44:47 -0800 (PST) Subject: Cheating In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20060112164447.40913.qmail@web53206.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 146370 Nicky Joe wrote: > Also, did anyone notice in HBP that when Snape was talking to > Narcissa about Draco that Snape said, "I happen to know about > Draco's mission." However, no one ever actually mentioned > what Draco's mission was. Did Snape REALLY know? Or was he > just pulling Bella's chain and got in a bit over his head when > Narcissa asked for the UV? He was just pulling Bella's chain and probably he saw it also in Narcissa's mind. maria8162001 From antoshachekhonte at yahoo.com Fri Jan 13 05:05:50 2006 From: antoshachekhonte at yahoo.com (antoshachekhonte) Date: Fri, 13 Jan 2006 05:05:50 -0000 Subject: Who dies in 7? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146371 Jan: > > I can't believe that the series will suddenly turn into a blood bath. > But I am sure that at least one major good guy (and some minor good > guys) will die. Too many, and it would lose all impact. None, and the > victory would be too easy. > > The two major characters who have died so far, Sirius and Dumbledore > have both been father figures for Harry. I wonder if that theme will > continue. If so, Hagrid and Arthur Weasly have fulfilled an almost > parental role for Harry. Hagrid would be the saddest death, so I'd > place my bets there. > > If I was at Hogwarts, I think I'd be popular with Sybill Trelawney. I > seem to have nominated just about everyone for death, including Harry > Potter! :-) > Antosha: I somehow doubt that this is going to turn into a Jacobean blood tragedy. We (that is, we modern folk) lack the world view to make that sort of story truly satisfying. What would be the point? It wouldn't be a whole lot better than ending the series by having LV cackling over Harry's corpse. Sure, you can end it that way, but why? Is that somehow supposed to be interesting? Regarding who the "big" death that caused Dr. Murray such distress was... well, I've shared my thoughts a bit elsewhere, but I don't think Luna or Neville are going to die because, again, what's the point. Oh, yay, miserable quasi-orphan finally begins to have a life, then, oops! Boy, that'll keep the little b#$$tards quiet, as an old time radio kids announcer once said. Ron and Hermione seem more likely, since their deaths would actually mean something in the moral structure of the series: they love each other, they love Harry--dying for Harry or for each other would be a meaningful act. It'd bum me out, and, if it was too heavy handed, would shift the whole series deep into Dickensian melodrama, but there you are. Hagrid also seems likely, for the reasons you've pointed out. Mr. Weasley too--though Harry really hasn't connected with him. MRS. WEASLEY, though is all but his second mother, and mothers' deaths are deeply meaningful in this series. Just a thought. Antosha, who just lost a mother-in-law. From maria8162001 at yahoo.com Thu Jan 12 20:47:03 2006 From: maria8162001 at yahoo.com (Maria Vaerewijck) Date: Thu, 12 Jan 2006 12:47:03 -0800 (PST) Subject: Who dies in 7? / Who is she talking about? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20060112204703.14200.qmail@web53213.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 146372 Nicky Joe wrote: > This started on OT Chatter but Katherine's response was too > good so I pulled it over. >> Quote from this interview: >> "In the seventh book there will be deaths of both, goodies >> and baddies. She was talking to her husband, Neil, the other >> day, after she has just writing the death of one particular >> character. He shuddered. "Oh don't do that", he said to me, >> but of course, I did." > Katherine: > > I think that it's probably gonna be Hagrid who bites it. > > As far as deaths go, I'd bet the following: > > > > 1 major shocking death. For this I vote Hagrid; Nicky Joe: > For major shocking death I either vote for Hagrid or Hermione. > > Katherine: > > 1 Personally-affecting Harry loss. For this I vote Hedwig; > > Nicky Joe: > The Hermione thing would take care of this, also. > Katherine: > > 1 Total screwup at Hogwarts. I predict Harry's > > growing closer to Flitwick as he learns more about his > > mother's prowess in Charms--only to have Flitwick bite it > > in the end. Nicky Joe: > I would vote for Trelawney on this one. > Katherine: > > 1 Rocking of the Weasley boat. The Weasleys are Harry's > > surrogate family. There needs to be some conflict there. > > If she were smart she'd axe Charlie--he's outlived > > his purpose, . If she were middling cruel she'd send > > one (or both) twins to their mortal end. If she wants > > to be really mean as a snake (ha!) she'll kill Arthur. > > But, I'm betting she'll get her big bang from Hagrid, > > so Charlie is her Weasley Sacrifice. Nicky Joe: > What about Molly? That would be a bigger blow > than Arthur, actually. maria8162001 here: I will go for Snape as it was already said by Voldy in the GOF; 'And here we have six missing Death Eater... three dead in my service. One, too cowardly to return... he will pay. One who I believe has left me forever... he will be killed, of course... and one, who remains my most faithful servant, and who has already re-entered my service.' We know that it was Karkaroff who is to cowardly to return and he's already dead, and the most faithful servant was Barty Crouch,jr., and even when everybody believes that Snape killed Dumbledore and he's really evil, I would beg to differ with that I believe what Voldy said that "he believes Snape left him forever." I go for Snape being a goner halfway of book 7. greenfirespike wrote re JKR's quote: > Do we have a guess who this is? My guess is a 'goodie', and > that would be Neville. maria8162001: For million of children to rejoice: my guess is Snape, and for them to weep: it would be Lupin or Molly. My reason for Lupin is because his cover was already blown up and Greyback knows already that he's on the goodies side, and for Molly is because she's in the Order and it would really make every reader not only the children weep if she dies, that's what I think of course. Any other guess? From jazmyn at pacificpuma.com Fri Jan 13 06:03:57 2006 From: jazmyn at pacificpuma.com (Jazmyn Concolor) Date: Thu, 12 Jan 2006 22:03:57 -0800 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Squibs have genes to do magic? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <43C742CD.7020006@pacificpuma.com> No: HPFGUIDX 146373 Jen Reese wrote: >Thinking about Mrs. Figg or Filch doing spontaneous magic later in >life made me wonder if that's possible. I thought the whole point of a >Squib is that he/she doesn't have magical genes; Even immersing >themselves in the magical world as Filch does, how could they suddenly >perform magic? Magic is supposedly due to a dominant gene, so it seems >like it would be equivalent to changing your eye-color, but then I >have a mental block about genetics. > > > JK knows NOTHING about genetics. You can not have 'mudbloods' if its a dominant gene. Its got to be a recessive gene if you can have two muggles produce a wizard. Genetics was my area in college, so I know what I am talking about here. Very likely because pureblood families produce squibs, then its likely that squibs and muggle descended from wizard families are homozygous (recessive) for the wizard gene, wizards are heterozygous. Not all muggles carry the gene. Only those who have wizards somewhere back in their ancestry and just the one homozygous carrier might have more then one wizard child. In fact, unless there is a secondary gene that nullifies any magic genes, all their kids would be magical. Meaning logically, that there's a chance Lily's mother was either cheating on her husband or her sister hated magic so much that she repressed any that she might have had or due to a mutation or other gene problem, popped up as a carrier and Dudley might turn up with powers later in life. JK's idea simply does not work. If Wizard genes were always dominant, there would be NO squibs born to purebred families. Jazmyn From irish_glory11 at yahoo.com Thu Jan 12 21:23:15 2006 From: irish_glory11 at yahoo.com (irish_glory11) Date: Thu, 12 Jan 2006 21:23:15 -0000 Subject: Who dies in 7? / I can't believe how good these are In-Reply-To: <20060112203110.53579.qmail@web30209.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146374 First off, I'm new here..so hello everyone. Now, I just started reading this series about 3 months ago and I am already up to the 5th book. I thought I had a lot of questions in my mind after the 4th one but this one is blowing me away. I'm mainly waiting to find out why Harry has to go back to the Dursleys' year after year and why Voldemort wanted to kill him in the first place and why he couldn't. Can't wait to get onto the 6th one. I might be one of the only people here that thinks Harry Potter will die in the 7th. Just something about the thought that he will have to decide between what is easy and what is right just makes me think something could happen there. "irish_glory11" From dobbyisdumbledore at yahoo.com Thu Jan 12 22:38:38 2006 From: dobbyisdumbledore at yahoo.com (dobbyisdumbledore) Date: Thu, 12 Jan 2006 22:38:38 -0000 Subject: RAB's identity and significance / Sirius' father In-Reply-To: <20060104123159.14011.qmail@web25312.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146375 > katydid wrote: > What does anyone know about Sirius Blacks' father? We see > mention of his mother and the portrait..but nothing at all > about the father. I have been unable to even find a > name, as I thought he could perhaps be RAB. > > Becky : > Perhaps he stole the horcrux as revenge for LV > killing his youngest son. > > JKR said that RAB being Regulus Black was a 'fine guess' but > that doesn't mean it was correct, maybe just close. Interesting thing is... it almost certainly HAS to be a member of the Black family. 1.) In the Dutch version, Black is translated as "Zwarts". The initials R.A.B. are changed to R.A.Z. in the Dutch version. 2.) In the Norweigen version, Black is translated as "Svarrt". The initials R.A.B. are changed to R.A.S. in the Norweigan version. The other R.A.B. suspect's names (names that involve a last name starting with B.) don't change. Im fairly certain that it is Regulus (or in the VERY least... someone with the Black name. "dobbyisdumbledore" From babyhrndz at yahoo.com Fri Jan 13 00:30:53 2006 From: babyhrndz at yahoo.com (Amanda Shoffner) Date: Thu, 12 Jan 2006 16:30:53 -0800 (PST) Subject: ESE! Snape or not (Was: Re: Cheating) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20060113003053.36245.qmail@web30803.mail.mud.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 146376 Amanda: The main reason I like HP4GU is this, getting ideas and insight from others about things I have and have not thought up yet. Alla- I agree with you, SS values DD?s protection. Yet SS chose to help out HP when he didn?t have to. Neri has a good theory about SS&JP LD. Having the Life Debt along with telling LV about the first half of the prophesy ultimately having a hand in LP&JP?s death, should the LD have kicked in at that time? Yet one can argue that SS did not know that it was the Potters the prophesy was about. I don?t know. Yet DD might have told SS the LD is now for HP. That would be reason for DD to tell HP that HP has no reason to doubt SS. For someone Carol-In answer to your question, ESE means SS is for LV. In regards to the movie point of reference, IMO seeing that JKR is overseeing the production of the movies, I think she would let the director know if that would/wouldn?t be characteristic of SS and make sure that everything goes along with her books. Thanks for the input and helping bring to light more ideas and facts. So much speculation and so little answers to the riddles. I hope time has a broom to fly on because the suspense is putting a killing curse on my patience. Lol ~Amanda ? hoping not to be disappointed and find a (DDM)! Snape. From quick_silver71 at yahoo.ca Fri Jan 13 06:26:53 2006 From: quick_silver71 at yahoo.ca (quick_silver71) Date: Fri, 13 Jan 2006 06:26:53 -0000 Subject: BloodBath in Book 7 Was Re:Who dies in 7? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146377 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "antoshachekhonte" wrote: > > Jan: > > > > I can't believe that the series will suddenly turn into a blood bath. > > But I am sure that at least one major good guy (and some minor good > > guys) will die. Too many, and it would lose all impact. None, and the > > victory would be too easy. > > > > The two major characters who have died so far, Sirius and Dumbledore > > have both been father figures for Harry. I wonder if that theme will > > continue. If so, Hagrid and Arthur Weasly have fulfilled an almost > > parental role for Harry. Hagrid would be the saddest death, so I'd > > place my bets there. > > > > > If I was at Hogwarts, I think I'd be popular with Sybill Trelawney. I > > seem to have nominated just about everyone for death, including Harry > > Potter! :-) > > > > > Antosha: > > I somehow doubt that this is going to turn into a Jacobean blood > tragedy. We (that is, we modern folk) lack the world view to make that > sort of story truly satisfying. What would be the point? It wouldn't > be a whole lot better than ending the series by having LV cackling > over Harry's corpse. Sure, you can end it that way, but why? Is that > somehow supposed to be interesting? I must differ in this view form most people in this group but I think that to a certain extent book 7 could (dare I say should) be a blood bath. Look at the end of HBP...a DE dies from a badly aimed curse (which is also revealing in that the caster wouldn't have been focused on killing one of their own). That death was totally random yet it showed, to me anyway, that this is going to be a dangerous conflict. I'd also like to point out that the reader hasn't yet seen Voldemort, in all his power, among the common wizard. The only times we've actually seen Voldemort fight is against his equals (Harry and Dumbledore) so I personally hope that we, the reader, get to see the cat among the mice so to speak (Dumbledore got a scene like this when Fudge tried to arrest him). In fact I think that a lot of people in their discussion about the Weasley wedding could be overlooking something. Think about it...it's likely that a large number of Order members are going to attend; there'll be Ministry staff on hand, maybe even some Aurors for protection, and Harry Potter. If Voldemort wanted to send a message to the wizarding world I can't think of a better way then doing a little wedding crashing. I'm also of the opinion that either the Ministry or the Order must be put out of commission before Harry's final victory. Unfortunately I lean towards the Order for several reasons. The Ministry simply isn't pro-Harry enough nor can I see Harry asking them for aid and the split seems to be semi-public knowledge which means the Order is really Harry's main support base. The Order seems relatively weak without Dumbledore to lead them and I have trouble finding another leader among the current ranks (I also believe that Voldemort's attacks on the Order have been focused on stripping away the leadership potential within it). Quick_Silver (thinking that most people will disagree) From finwitch at yahoo.com Fri Jan 13 06:30:26 2006 From: finwitch at yahoo.com (finwitch) Date: Fri, 13 Jan 2006 06:30:26 -0000 Subject: Squibs have genes to do magic? In-Reply-To: <43C742CD.7020006@pacificpuma.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146378 Jazmyn: > JK knows NOTHING about genetics. You can not have 'mudbloods' if its a > dominant gene. Its got to be a recessive gene if you can have two > muggles produce a wizard. Genetics was my area in college, so I know > what I am talking about here. -- > JK's idea simply does not work. If Wizard genes were always dominant, > there would be NO squibs born to purebred families. Finwitch: Squibs, however, are rare - and much more so than Muggleborns. I thought it may be a mutation which just happened in reproducive cells. Most likely in the male's. And that it's recessive (explaining how Muggles can produce wizards). On the other hand, it *could* be that instead of a single gene, magic comes out of a combination of genes. After all, some are stronger in magic than others. (Compare Dumbledore and Lockhart). It even may be that it's not about genetics at all. Magic has its own rules, you know. Consider, for instance, that Parselmouth-ability appears hereditary (Gaunts&Riddle&Slytherin) but Harry gained it trough Voldemort's 'marking him as his equal'. Finwitch From tonks_op at yahoo.com Fri Jan 13 07:01:20 2006 From: tonks_op at yahoo.com (Tonks) Date: Fri, 13 Jan 2006 07:01:20 -0000 Subject: Wording of the Prophecy In-Reply-To: <20060113041518.82952.qmail@web53309.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146379 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Bee Chase wrote: > Goddlefrood wrote: > Luckdragon: > > Yes! Tom Riddle & Lord Voldemort are the same being, however the > prophecy was worded very carefully by the writer and only refers to LV under his assumed name and not his birth name. > > Goddlefrood > > Quite simply it does not. It states that the one with the power to > defeat the Dark Lord approaches. (snip> Luckdragon: > Sorry! Lord Voldemort/Dark Lord. I humbly stand corrected. Tonks now: This leads me to thinking again about the concept of The Dark Lord and what this little detail might mean to unraveling the prophecy. Who is the Dark Lord? Is it Tom Riddle turned Lord Voldemort or is the Dark Lord something else. I wrote about this some time ago, but I can never find an old post so I will try to say it again. In real occult literature the Dark Lord is Death. Lord Voldemort is trying to become the Lord over Death, or the Lord of Death, but has he really? Here is something that I found among occult items. It is called the charge to the Dark God, but it could be called the Dark Lord I think. Now I don't profess to know much about the occult, but coming across this I thought of LV and the fact that the Death Eaters call him The Dark Lord. Why do they do that? Perhaps that is a cue of some sort. Otherwise why wouldn't the prophesy say LV. It doesn't, it says "Dark Lord." And herein may be our answer. We know (from JKR's recent interview) that the main theme of the books is death and the trumpet of Love over Death. (This by the way is a strong Christian theme as well.) Here is the first part of "Charge of the Dark God": "I am the Shadow in the bright day. I am the reminder of motility at the height of living. I am the never-ending veil of Night, where the star goddess dances. I am the Death that must be so that Life can continue, for behold, Life is immortal because the living must die. I am the strength that protects, that limits; I am the power that says No, No Further and That Is Enough. I am the thing that can not be spoken of; I am the laughter at the edge of death " I don't know the origin of this writing. Or if it was some ancient source that maybe JKR is aware of or not. In order to understand the prophesy, we may need to think outside of the box. What exactly does LV represent in these books? Why is he called only "the Dark Lord" by his followers? In this Charge to the Dark God, there are some things that look familiar, such as "I am the laugher at the edge of Death". Remember the high pitched laughter when Lily was killed? And the "I am the one that can not be spoken of" and the fact that in HP most do not want to say LV's name. And what does that convoluted part about immortality and death mean here? Again, maybe this is a clue to the prophesy. What I am not sure, but is seems structured in the same way. As some sort of union of opposites or ??? There must be someone here that can see something that I can't. Maybe a Philosophy professor??? I am sure that if we all put our heads together, we can figure this out. "One can not live while the other survives". Life can not go on for ever while Death survives. "One must die at the hand of the other" are we talking about Love and Death here as personified in Harry and LV?? Maybe it is all a metaphor. I am just pondering as I go here any ideas?? Somehow I think it comes down to the only way to overcome Death (the Dark Lord) is by Love and the Eternal life that this brings. This would be as in the Christian concept of Eternal life thru Christ. as opposed to the false eternal life that Tom Riddle seeks. I would bet somehow this is what she will get to in the end, in subliminal form of course, but how?? Tonks_op From babyhrndz at yahoo.com Fri Jan 13 01:31:00 2006 From: babyhrndz at yahoo.com (Amanda Shoffner) Date: Thu, 12 Jan 2006 17:31:00 -0800 (PST) Subject: Voldemort "intentionally" makes Harry a Horcrux? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20060113013100.82390.qmail@web30804.mail.mud.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 146380 Amanda: I have had thoughts on this as well. Yet I came to the conclusion that the prophecy goes against it. The prophecy states that one will have to kill the other, and one cannot live while the other survives. If it is LV that cannot live while HP survives, that would mean that LV would have to kill a piece of his own soul, which he has been using to ensure his 'immortality'. On the other hand if it is HP that cannot live while the other survives, then if HP lives, LV will not die as his soul is in HP as a horcrux. If LV was to make HP a horcrux, that would be a waste of his soul since right afterwards he tries to kill HP. I had a convo w/ some HP fan friends of mine on this one when I thought of this possibility. But then again, JKR could make that the twist of fate at the end. What do you think? ~Amanda From quick_silver71 at yahoo.ca Fri Jan 13 07:22:55 2006 From: quick_silver71 at yahoo.ca (quick_silver71) Date: Fri, 13 Jan 2006 07:22:55 -0000 Subject: Harry the Defender Was Re: Harry Vanquishing LV without killing him. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146381 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "h2so3f" wrote: > > CH3ed: > I'd rather have Nagini be the last horcrux left and acts like a true > snake in the end by biting the own master, LV. Assuming that Nagini's > venom is fatal to LV when injected instead of taken orally, this will > kill LV's body (his home soul is again ripped from his body). Then > Harry can kill Nagini (an animal, afterall...and not a human), which > then should either kill LV's home soul for good, or leave it > vulnerable to be destroyed...maybe by a hungry dementor? Or both the > home soul and the last horcruxed soul could both die together when > Nagini bites LV? I have something of a moral quandary about Harry not killing Voldemort. Let's assume the Snape is completely on the "Good" side (i.e. allied with Dumlbedore and Harry and co.). Now Sanpe was willing, from a certain point of view, to kill Dumbledore for a plan that "may" have helped bring about Voldemort's final defeat. It could not, perhaps Voldemort secretly knows about it or even planned Dumbledore death, and then Dumbledore's sacrifice is essentially pointless (from one point of view). Now this troubles me because: 1) Snape killed in the name of the greater good, 2) Dumbledore asked Snape to use Dark magic to do the deed (so much for Dumbledore opposing Dark magic eh?), and 3) If Dumbledore is willing to ask Snape to use Dark magic why couldn't he, Dumbledore, have tried to kill Voldemort with it (before he knew about the Horcrux's). Harry has every reason from twisted and dark (Voldemort killed his parent's so he want revenge) to noble (saving the lives of those that will die because of Voldemort) to kill Voldemort. He almost certainly has self-defense on his side and the support of the society which is threatened by Voldemort. The fact that Snape and Dumbledore felt that they had to step over the live (i.e. not kill and not use the Dark Arts) means that Harry too should learn that there is a line and sometimes is has to be crossed. Using a Dementor is even worse then murder because IMO Dementor represent a force of death and decay in the world (Dumbledore certainly didn't like them) and they are described as vile and foul by Lupin. In a way using a Dementor would be like me letting a lion killer a murderer. Technically I didn't kill the person but in reality I did in fact the Dementor's don't care about innocence so they can't even pass a moral judgment on Voldemort. JMO by using a Voldemort against Voldemort is on the same level, if not worse, then using the Dark Arts against him and Death Eaters. Now maybe I'm over-analyzing but I often think of Harry like Hector of Troy (although I've never read the Iliad I've seen the recent movie and read summaries and spark notes of the story). He can be proud, arrogant at times, and sometimes cruel but at his heart he is the Defender of the Wizarding World. Note that word...Defender...he is not a great thinker, inventor, moralizer, man of the age, etc. like Dumbledore or maybe even like Snape (assuming a best case Snape). Harry is existentially a warrior in my mind, perhaps reluctant...which is probably a good thing because he avoids many of the problems that come with seeking out conflict (look at the lives of Draco, James, Sirius, Fred and George, Percy, Snape, Tom Riddle). Harry is the best at the most martial type of magic, Defense against the Dark Arts (surpassing even Hermione...did anyone in his grade other then him get a DADA owl of O?)...and excels at physical activities. Part of defending the wizarding world means Harry may have to use lethal force. Now will that damage his soul...probably...yet is that sacrifice worth making? Dumbledore sacrificed his life for a plan (assuming there was some sort of plan going on the Tower). On a side note...the reason that I make the comparison between Harry and Hector is that JK in a interview said that part of the graveyard scene was based on part of the Iliad (the Hector Patroclus Achilles triangle). I also noticed that Voldemort has a similar obsession as Achilles...he was to be immortal (Achilles in the sense that people will remember him, Voldemort means it literally). What's more both are portrayed as being powerful...Achilles is unrivalled in his fighting abilities and Voldemort is probably the mightiest wizard alive. Quick_Silver (rambling and incoherent at this time in the morning) From quick_silver71 at yahoo.ca Fri Jan 13 07:29:17 2006 From: quick_silver71 at yahoo.ca (quick_silver71) Date: Fri, 13 Jan 2006 07:29:17 -0000 Subject: Harry the Defender Was Re: Harry Vanquishing LV without killing him Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146382 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "h2so3f" wrote: > > CH3ed: > I'd rather have Nagini be the last horcrux left and acts like a true > snake in the end by biting the own master, LV. Assuming that Nagini's > venom is fatal to LV when injected instead of taken orally, this will > kill LV's body (his home soul is again ripped from his body). Then > Harry can kill Nagini (an animal, afterall...and not a human), which > then should either kill LV's home soul for good, or leave it > vulnerable to be destroyed...maybe by a hungry dementor? Or both the > home soul and the last horcruxed soul could both die together when > Nagini bites LV? I have something of a moral quandary about Harry not killing Voldemort. Let's assume the Snape is completely on the "Good" side (i.e. allied with Dumlbedore and Harry and co.). Now Sanpe was willing, from a certain point of view, to kill Dumbledore for a plan that "may" have helped bring about Voldemort's final defeat. It could not, perhaps Voldemort secretly knows about it or even planned Dumbledore death, and then Dumbledore's sacrifice is essentially pointless (from one point of view). Now this troubles me because: 1) Snape killed in the name of the greater good, 2) Dumbledore asked Snape to use Dark magic to do the deed (so much for Dumbledore opposing Dark magic eh?), and 3) If Dumbledore is willing to ask Snape to use Dark magic why couldn't he, Dumbledore, have tried to kill Voldemort with it (before he knew about the Horcrux's). Harry has every reason from twisted and dark (Voldemort killed his parent's so he wants revenge) to noble (saving the lives of those that will die because of Voldemort) to kill Voldemort. He almost certainly has self-defense on his side and the support of the society which is threatened by Voldemort. The fact that Snape and Dumbledore felt that they had to step over the line (i.e. not kill and not use the Dark Arts) means that Harry too should learn that there is a line and sometimes is has to be crossed. Using a Dementor is even worse then murder because IMO Dementor represent a force of death and decay in the world (Dumbledore certainly didn't like them) and they are described as vile and foul by Lupin. In a way using a Dementor would be like me letting a lion killer a murderer. Technically I didn't kill the person but in reality I did in fact the Dementor's don't care about innocence so they can't even pass a moral judgment on Voldemort. JMO by using a Dementor against Voldemort is on the same level, if not worse, then using the Dark Arts against him and Death Eaters. Now maybe I'm over-analyzing but I often think of Harry like Hector of Troy (although I've never read the Iliad I've seen the recent movie and read summaries and spark notes of the story). He can be proud, arrogant at times, and sometimes cruel but at his heart he is the Defender of the Wizarding World. Note that word...Defender...he is not a great thinker, inventor, moralizer, man of the age, etc. like Dumbledore or maybe even like Snape (assuming a best case Snape). Harry is essentially a warrior in my mind, perhaps reluctant...which is probably a good thing because he avoids many of the problems that come with seeking out conflict (look at the lives of Draco, James, Sirius, Fred and George, Percy, Snape, Tom Riddle). Harry is the best at the most martial type of magic, Defense against the Dark Arts (surpassing even Hermione...did anyone in his grade other then him get a DADA owl of O?)...and excels at physical activities. Part of defending the wizarding world means Harry may have to use lethal force. Now will that damage his soul...probably...yet is that sacrifice worth making? Dumbledore sacrificed his life for a plan (assuming there was some sort of plan going on the Tower). On a side note...the reason that I make the comparison between Harry and Hector is that JK in a interview said that part of the graveyard scene was based on part of the Iliad (the Hector Patroclus Achilles triangle). I also noticed that Voldemort has a similar obsession as Achilles...he was to be immortal (Achilles in the sense that people will remember him, Voldemort means it literally). What's more both are portrayed as being powerful...Achilles is unrivalled in his fighting abilities and Voldemort is probably the mightiest wizard alive. Quick_Silver (rambling and incoherent at this time in the morning saying sorry for posting twice but I'm slow tonight) From dobbyisdumbledore at yahoo.com Fri Jan 13 00:39:05 2006 From: dobbyisdumbledore at yahoo.com (dobbyisdumbledore) Date: Fri, 13 Jan 2006 00:39:05 -0000 Subject: Was Voldemort intentionally making HP a horcrux. Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146383 Richard: > There's a hole in your argument where you have Voldemort under > an Unbreakable Vow not to harm Lily, in that it would have > meant that in explicitly killing Lily (whom he gave the chance > to step aside) would have invoked the Vow and thus death. "dobbyisdumbledore": I understand your position for reasons against Lily's death/a Voldemort Unbreakable Vow. However, that was rather secondary to the point regarding intentionally making Harry a Horcrux before he tried to kill him. From gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk Fri Jan 13 07:44:47 2006 From: gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk (Geoff Bannister) Date: Fri, 13 Jan 2006 07:44:47 -0000 Subject: July 31 2007 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146384 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Luckdragon" wrote: Luckdragon: > Is anyone else planning on reading the last page first? > What questions do you want answered above all others. Geoff: I must confess that I shall do the same. It is a standing joke in my household that I always have to know how a film, book or TV episode ends. I think it must be some sort of confidence hang-up.... Once I have an idea of what has happened, I can then quite happily work through the book wondering how we are going to arrive at this conclusion that the last word is "scar" and my membership of the "Harry Will Live" society is still valid. Perhaps Sherry and I will have to have an off-group discussion since I shall be on Brisith Summer Time (assuming that our tame prophet's prediction of the date is accurate). Dear me, it seems a long way to 31/07/07 or whatever the date is..... From bboyminn at yahoo.com Fri Jan 13 08:48:23 2006 From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Fri, 13 Jan 2006 08:48:23 -0000 Subject: Voldemort "intentionally" makes Harry a Horcrux? - But WHY? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146385 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "dobbyisdumbledore" wrote: > > > ... > > What better course of action (then) to attempt to 'cover all > bases'? > > By Killing James, Voldemort has the sufficent murder to create > his Horcrux. The Horcrux would then put on (into?) the baby > Potter. > > Voldemort would THEN attempt to kill Harry. If he kills him, > he loses one 7th of his soul... but also rids himself of the > prophecy child. This is a reasonable cost. > >...edited... > > > dobbyisdumbledore > bboyminn: Sorry but you've competely lost me. First, why would Voldemort make a Horcrux with the specific intent of destroying it. Let's remember that you only need one Horcrux to protect yourself from death, and by the time Voldemort is ready to kill Harry, he already has five. He is more that well protected. Further, why not just kill Harry rather than putting a piece of his own soul in Harry then killing him and thereby destroy the soul bit? Harry is no more or less vulnerable to attack because he has a bit of Voldemort's soul in him. It's a good thought, but you have really failed to explain any reason or advantage for Voldemort placing that soul bit in Harry. Nor do I see a clear reason for Voldemort destroying that action immediately after commiting it. What does he gain? How is this action to his advantage? How does it in any way solve any problem? Since Voldemort can kill Harry with or without the soul piece, what is the advantage to doing it with the soul piece? Just curious. Steve/bboyminn From ornawn at 013.net Fri Jan 13 09:18:07 2006 From: ornawn at 013.net (ornadv) Date: Fri, 13 Jan 2006 09:18:07 -0000 Subject: Squibs have genes to do magic? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146386 >Jen Reese >Thinking about Mrs. Figg or Filch doing spontaneous magic later in >life made me wonder if that's possible. I thought the whole point >of a Squib is that he/she doesn't have magical genes; Even immersing >themselves in the magical world as Filch does, how could they >suddenly perform magic? Magic is supposedly due to a dominant gene, >so it seems like it would be equivalent to changing your eye-color, >but then I have a mental block about genetics. >Jazmyn: >JK knows NOTHING about genetics. You can not have 'mudbloods' if >its a dominant gene. Its got to be a recessive gene if you can have >two muggles produce a wizard. Genetics was my area in college, so I >know what I am talking about here. >Finwitch >It even may be that it's not about genetics at all. Magic has its >own rules, you know. Orna: Magic seems to be a gene which needs some environmental support to come into being. So not blue eyes, but musical ability - perhaps. Could/Would that make magic a multi-gene combination, Jazmyn? Hagrid inquires Harry, if his funny things haven't happened to him while he was very angry, or afraid. Neville's family tried to discover magic signs in him, by putting him in terrifying situations ? nearly killing him in the process. Merope looked like a squib in Gaunt's family - seems like an overdose of fright and abusive relation can vanquish magical abilities. Same seems to apply to Neville, who only in the DA-club, when Harry treats him with dignity and confidence seems to flourish ? magically. Merope finally lost her abilities, when she lost the hope for love (BTW a very cynical twist, because Voldemort could have been a person to appreciate most the power of love). So it seems that magical abilities are usually revealed before age 11, but may sometimes stay dormant, or become dormant or even lost in special adverse conditions. It would be difficult later in life to evoke them, like, many skills, but it might be possible, perhaps under special circumstances. Orna From h2so3f at yahoo.com Fri Jan 13 09:55:01 2006 From: h2so3f at yahoo.com (h2so3f) Date: Fri, 13 Jan 2006 09:55:01 -0000 Subject: Harry the Defender Was Re: Harry Vanquishing LV without killing him In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146387 quick_silver wrote: "I have something of a moral quandary about Harry not killing Voldemort." CH3ed: I think Harry will ultimately kill Voldy, too, but perhaps not directly (as in AKing him). I've had a nap now so I'm thinking a bit better and will revise my scenario a bit. What if Nagini is the last horcrux left, and some thing Harry and/or Voldy does causes her to turn on her master and bite Voldy, killing his body. Voldy's home soul is ripped from his body (assuming the venom is fatal when injected rather than drunk). Harry then kills Nagini, and the lost of his last horcrux and the lack of body combine to cause Voldy's home soul to disintegrate or get sucked behind the veil. This doesn't seem to violate the terms of the prophesy since Voldy still dies at Harry's hand, with the upside that Harry doesn't end up murdering anyone....except for a nasty snake. Of course this depends on the assumption that the badly mangled home soul could not survive without a body once all the horcruxes are destroyed. I personally won't have any problem with Harry actually having to AK Voldy or other DEs. Not all killings are immoral. But since JKR seems so bent on love being the prevailing force in the end, and since Harry is supposed to be the wielder of that love magic...and so no unforgiveable curses for him. This is my best effort of thinking up a scenario to have Harry fulfill the prophecy without using the dark arts. I enjoyed Quick_Silver's reference of the Iliad so much I'm gonna dig up that book to read again just for fun. Thanks!! CH3ed :O) From ceridwennight at hotmail.com Fri Jan 13 11:08:01 2006 From: ceridwennight at hotmail.com (Ceridwen) Date: Fri, 13 Jan 2006 11:08:01 -0000 Subject: July 31 2007 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146388 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Geoff Bannister" wrote: > > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Luckdragon" > wrote: > > Luckdragon: > > > Is anyone else planning on reading the last page first? > > What questions do you want answered above all others. > > Geoff: > I must confess that I shall do the same. It is a standing joke in my > household that I always have to know how a film, book or TV episode > ends. I think it must be some sort of confidence hang-up.... Ceridwen: I have to know, too. For HBP, I forced my elder daughter (who didn't have kids to feed and chase to bed) to tell me who died. Wondering was ruining the reading experience for me. That's one reason why I try to stay away from the hype and interviews, though that's impossible unless I completely divorce myself from canon discussions, LiveJournal, etc. and withdraw into a world of my own. Geoff: > Once I have an idea of what has happened, I can then quite happily work > through the book wondering how we are going to arrive at this > conclusion that the last word is "scar" and my membership of the "Harry > Will Live" society is still valid. Ceridwen: We know the last word is 'scar' because JKR has said so in more than one interview. I saw one where she even showed the envelope with the final chapter in it and said it again (yes, I couldn't resist watching her on TV, so sue me!). I do think Harry will live. I do think Voldemort will become some version of Veil!Mort (rather than Muggle!Mort). Even when I know the destination, I like the process of getting there. And, I like the proposed date. Wouldn't it be fitting? Ceridwen. From ornawn at 013.net Fri Jan 13 12:08:34 2006 From: ornawn at 013.net (ornadv) Date: Fri, 13 Jan 2006 12:08:34 -0000 Subject: The Strange Attitude of Voldemort on the Killing of Lily Potter Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146389 >Bart >This is based on two not unreasonable assumptions: >1) Voldemort fully expected Lily to take his offer. >2) Voldemort had something to gain if she did. >Given the theme of the power of love and Voldemort's rejection of >it, it would make literary sense if it was connected. Given this >logical house of cards (albeit pretty sturdy cards), what Voldemort >was looking to do was proving that love could be overcome, in this >case by fear of death. Orna: My favorite thoughts on this issue: Voldemort essence is conquering death, since death is believed to be the worst thing "in life". Harry's essence has to do with proving that love is the strongest power. Now, Voldemort with his offer for Lily was counting (and depending) on her to choose life over love. Voldemort needed this, because it meant: 1) His striving for immortality is indeed striving for the greatest power possible ? all others can be overcome ? so every time he conquers a force- he is strengthened. 2) If love can be overcome ? by fear of death or by egocentric feelings ? Merope's dying on his birth isn't such an insult for him. After all, the only thing which could have kept her alive could be love for him. She did stay alive until his birth, BTW, but she was ready to die, in spite of that meaning that he would be growing up as an orphan, in a muggle orphanage. Actually Merope is a person who Voldemort and Harry should have many difficulties in understanding ? she doesn't mind to die ? which for Voldemort looks the worst thing. And she hasn't got enough love to stay alive for her son ? which for Harry looks incomprehensible. >Bart: >I might go further to say that, if Lily took his offer, he would >have his hooks in her in some way, shape, or form (the >elusive "life debt"?). Orna: That would be a very ingenious and devilish life dept ? since she would owe her life to him, and as well owe him her son's death. But it would prove that life-dept is more than love-dept if his hold on her worked. It looks like a reverse of what Merope did to him ? giving Tom his life ? and having his mother die. I don't know where it leads to, but it sounds interesting for further thoughts on it. Orna From phil at pcsgames.net Fri Jan 13 12:08:36 2006 From: phil at pcsgames.net (Phil Vlasak) Date: Fri, 13 Jan 2006 07:08:36 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: July 31 2007 References: Message-ID: <0cbe01c6183a$1aa99910$6600a8c0@phil> No: HPFGUIDX 146390 Geoff Bannister said: > Perhaps Sherry and I will have to have an off-group discussion since I > shall be on Brisith Summer Time (assuming that our tame prophet's > prediction of the date is accurate). > > Dear me, it seems a long way to 31/07/07 or whatever the date is..... Now Phil: I like the date of,070707 better! It's a magic number and gets the book to us 24 days sooner! From becks3uk at yahoo.co.uk Fri Jan 13 11:15:42 2006 From: becks3uk at yahoo.co.uk (Rebecca Williams) Date: Fri, 13 Jan 2006 11:15:42 +0000 (GMT) Subject: Who is she talking about? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20060113111542.56980.qmail@web25307.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 146392 kchuplis: > You know, I really think poor Neville is just bound to bite it. > Because he is so intricately involved in the prophecy, it just seems a > necessary. > Becky: I have been thinking for a while that Neville might be the one to pop his clogs! JKR said she worded the prophecy very carefully and I keep thinking about the line 'neither can live while the other survives' - what if 'other' doesn't represent each other but the 'other' possible boy in the prophecy - i.e. Neville. What if he has to be the one to go? Just a thought. From antoshachekhonte at yahoo.com Fri Jan 13 15:07:28 2006 From: antoshachekhonte at yahoo.com (antoshachekhonte) Date: Fri, 13 Jan 2006 15:07:28 -0000 Subject: BloodBath in Book 7 Was Re:Who dies in 7? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146393 Quicksilver said: > > I must differ in this view form most people in this group but I > think that to a certain extent book 7 could (dare I say should) be a > blood bath. Look at the end of HBP...a DE dies from a badly aimed > curse (which is also revealing in that the caster wouldn't have been > focused on killing one of their own). That death was totally random > yet it showed, to me anyway, that this is going to be a dangerous > conflict. > > I'd also like to point out that the reader hasn't yet seen > Voldemort, in all his power, among the common wizard. The only times > we've actually seen Voldemort fight is against his equals (Harry and > Dumbledore) so I personally hope that we, the reader, get to see the > cat among the mice so to speak (Dumbledore got a scene like this > when Fudge tried to arrest him). In fact I think that a lot of > people in their discussion about the Weasley wedding could be > overlooking something. Think about it...it's likely that a large > number of Order members are going to attend; there'll be Ministry > staff on hand, maybe even some Aurors for protection, and Harry > Potter. If Voldemort wanted to send a message to the wizarding world > I can't think of a better way then doing a little wedding crashing. > > I'm also of the opinion that either the Ministry or the Order must > be put out of commission before Harry's final victory. Unfortunately > I lean towards the Order for several reasons. The Ministry simply > isn't pro-Harry enough nor can I see Harry asking them for aid and > the split seems to be semi-public knowledge which means the Order is > really Harry's main support base. The Order seems relatively weak > without Dumbledore to lead them and I have trouble finding another > leader among the current ranks (I also believe that Voldemort's > attacks on the Order have been focused on stripping away the > leadership potential within it). > > Quick_Silver (thinking that most people will disagree) > Antosha: Oh, I think people will die--people we know, people we don't. I was actually really saddened that two characters whom we had barely met but found quite interesting were summarily dispatched at the beginning of HBP (Emmaline Vance and Amelia Bones). I still feel that lots and lots and lots and lots and lots and lots and lots of dead bodies on stage, as it were, will actually make the deaths LESS significant. As someone who's seen and read more than my share of blood tragedies (for some reason that I'm still unable to ascertain, I have a master's degree in Renaissance drama), I can tell you that, at the end of a play by Ford or Webster or Tourneur, you don't feel anything like the anguish caused by Romeo and Juliet's or Othello and Desdemona's deaths. How would watching LV waste a few score Hogwarts students (as he is perfectly capable of doing) add anything to the book? It'd be nothing more than a biblical begat list--and anyone who's read La Morte D'Artur knows what I'm talking about: "And then Voldy slew Justin Finch-Fletchley and Hannah Abbott and Susan Bones and Rose Zeller, and the Hufflepuffs did moan and weap and gnash their teeth and cover their heads in ashes. Zacharais Smith he did not slay, for Zacharais Smith was a berk and not worth the trouble. And Voldy did take his wand and did slay Anthony Goldstein and Terry Boot and Su Li, and their entrails did spill upon the ground, and the Ravenclaws did cry unto Merlin for deliverance. And among the Slytherins he slew five and twenty who had not shown loyalty unto him, and his servants did kiss the hem of his garment and begged forgiveness. And then Voldy turned upon the Gryffindors and killed everyone not named Harry, until the Common Room did flow red with their blood.... blah blah blah." I don't find that particularly moving. Numbing, possibly. Tedious, in the extreme. But not particularly upsetting. There's an old truism in war reporting: one death is a tragedy; a hundred deaths is a statistic. As for the elimination of the Ministry and the Order... well, I think they've both already been sidelined. The last book is going to focus on Harry & Co's struggle against LV and his minions. The Ministry is already largely a non-player, and the Order will be up to its eyeballs off-screen dealing with the kinds of attacks we kept hearing about in HBP and OotP, while Harry, Ron and Hermione (and possibly, eventually, Ginny, Neville, Luna, the twins and a few other odd Weasleys and DA members) actually do the work of destroying the Horcruxes and vanquishing LV. I still think that any ending that is the equivalent of Dirty!Harry standing over LV with his wand pointed at his head, saying, "Do you feel lucky, punk?"--in other words, any ending that's simply a matter of Harry loading up for bear and blowing Voldemort away--is going to be unsatisfying. The series seems to be aiming at some sort of message of love, self-sacrifice and redemption, so macho posturing and alpha male dominance a la any Arnold Schwartzenegger movie aren't going to ring true. But that's me. ;-) From bawa_hrishikesh at yahoo.com Fri Jan 13 14:06:17 2006 From: bawa_hrishikesh at yahoo.com (Hrishikesh) Date: Fri, 13 Jan 2006 14:06:17 -0000 Subject: On our misconception about LV's speech to the DEs on his ressurection in GoF Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146394 After being resurrected physically, LV said to the DEs that one death eater having already entered his service, and about one who has left him, and whom his assumes will die. Now, we all thought that the first one was Barty Crouch Junior, & the second one was Snape. But what if it was the other way around! (Things are always the other way than what we imagine about Snape.) Maybe LV was already in contact with Snape, and took his help in preparing that potion, as we already know that Severus is good at making new spells & is exceptionally good enough at potions to be a teacher @ Hogwarts, & has immense knowledge about the Dark Arts. Maybe he already foresaw that once Barty had left for his mission, he had left forever, & that he would now of all times be exposed & judging the MoM or Crouch's behavior be killed anyway! Say what! HAPPY UTTARAYAN\MAKAR SAKRANTI to ALL From GAP5685 at AOL.com Fri Jan 13 15:13:11 2006 From: GAP5685 at AOL.com (gwen_of_the_oaks) Date: Fri, 13 Jan 2006 15:13:11 -0000 Subject: Voldemort "intentionally" makes Harry a Horcrux? - But WHY? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146395 > bboyminn: > > Sorry but you've competely lost me. First, why would Voldemort make a Horcrux with the specific intent of destroying it. Let's remember that you only need one Horcrux to protect yourself from death, and by the time Voldemort is ready to kill Harry, he already has five. He is more that well protected. > > Further, why not just kill Harry rather than putting a piece of his > own soul in Harry then killing him and thereby destroy the soul bit? > Harry is no more or less vulnerable to attack because he has a bit of Voldemort's soul in him. > > It's a good thought, but you have really failed to explain any reason or advantage for Voldemort placing that soul bit in Harry. Nor do I see a clear reason for Voldemort destroying that action immediatelyafter commiting it. Now Gwen: As to why choose Harry to be a Horcrux: At the time Voldemort hears the prophecy he is one Horcrux short of his magic number. Now he finds out there a wizard born who is - as far as LV knows from what he heard - the only one who has the power to defeat him. If he makes this wizard into a Horcrux he has arranged it so that he will never have the fear the one with the power to destroy him. Because the one with the power to destroy him is unwittingly keeping LV immortal. It is creating his own little catch-22. "If he loses to me, I live and no one else can defeat me. If he defeats me I live because he is a horcrux keeping my soul earth-bound." Either way, in a duel with this wizard at any point later, LV wins. As someone who likes to operate alone, this is perfect. Now as to why he would try to kill him right afterward: You are right, that part of the theory does not follow. First, LV does not know that "one must die at the hand of the other " because he did not hear that part of the prophecy. He has no reason to think that he *needs* to try and kill him. LV only knows that the baby will grow to be powerful enough to destroy him. Secondly, the very idea that the Horcrux is in him is the protection he needs. What I like about the Make-Harry-a-Horcrux idea is that it gives a reason for Lily to step aside that does not involve complicated love- triangles and unbreakable vows: Harry will live as a horcrux, and he will need a Mother. The question then becomes, as JKR said in an interview (IIRC), "Why did James *have* to die?". Gwen From rachelday at blueyonder.co.uk Fri Jan 13 15:22:50 2006 From: rachelday at blueyonder.co.uk (dream_catcher3010) Date: Fri, 13 Jan 2006 15:22:50 -0000 Subject: Squibs have genes to do magic? In-Reply-To: <43C742CD.7020006@pacificpuma.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146396 Jen Reese wrote: > > I thought the whole point of a Squib is that he/she doesn't have > > magical genes; Even immersing themselves in the magical world as > > Filch does, how could they suddenly perform magic? Magic is > > supposedly due to a dominant gene, so it seems like it would be > > equivalent to changing your eye-color.... Jazmyn: > JK knows NOTHING about genetics. You can not have 'mudbloods' if > its a dominant gene. Its got to be a recessive gene if you can > have two muggles produce a wizard. JK's idea simply does > not work. If Wizard genes were always dominant, there would be NO > squibs born to purebred families. JKR has never said that the wizarding gene is dominant. I think it's pretty clear that it HAS to be recessive for the reasons you put in your post re squibs and muggle borns. I can't find it right now, but didn't a newspaper or something write an article about genetics in the WW? just throwing my ball in Rachel From staceyv2220 at yahoo.com Fri Jan 13 15:36:36 2006 From: staceyv2220 at yahoo.com (staceyv2220) Date: Fri, 13 Jan 2006 15:36:36 -0000 Subject: Who is she talking about? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146397 kchuplis: > > You know, I really think poor Neville is just bound to bite it. Antosha: > You know, while I agree with this, the storyteller in me shrinks > from the idea of Neville buying it. The kid's life has sucked from > day one. > > Harry's death has the same problem, btw. Same with Ginny, who > suffered at Tom Riddle's hand and hasn't been able to redeem that > yet. Likewise, to a lesser degree, Luna's death would be all the > sadness without any payoff. It'd be simply miserable and nihilistic. > > The most logical candidate in my mind: Ron, if you think the chess > game was symbolic. Hermione is another, since at some point, Harry > is going to have to make do without her.... > > Of the older generation, the logical candidate is the one who has > hardly served a dramatic purpose since GoF: Hagrid. He was Harry's > introduction into the magical world, the threshold guardian, after a > fashion, since he is, after all, the Keeper of Keys, and he is one > of the people that Harry holds dearest. He owes Tom Riddle. Oh, dear, you're right. I hadn't considered Hagrid. He's toast. After Sirius and Dumbledore, he's the only adult Harry looks to as a parental figure. Neville has to live at least long enough to play a significant part in the final battle. Scars are not always visible, and I dare you to read the excerpt from St. Mungo's where he visits his parents and tell me he hasn't been scarred or "marked by the Dark Lord." We know Harry lives because 1. the last word is scar and 2. the running joke, per se, of the series has been the curse of the Defense teaching position. Originally, I thought it would be Snape for year 6 and Dumbledore for year 7. Okay, I was wrong. The position for year 7 is open, but Harry will probably not be attending, even if the school is open. In the resolution (last) chapter of book 7, I see Harry being offered the Defense position. It has been too much of a theme in the books to not be true. SV From staceyv2220 at yahoo.com Fri Jan 13 15:46:59 2006 From: staceyv2220 at yahoo.com (staceyv2220) Date: Fri, 13 Jan 2006 15:46:59 -0000 Subject: Cheating In-Reply-To: <20060112164447.40913.qmail@web53206.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146398 Nicky Joe wrote: > > Also, did anyone notice in HBP that when Snape was talking to > > Narcissa about Draco that Snape said, "I happen to know about > > Draco's mission." However, no one ever actually mentioned > > what Draco's mission was. Did Snape REALLY know? Or was he > > just pulling Bella's chain and got in a bit over his head when > > Narcissa asked for the UV? maria8162001: > He was just pulling Bella's chain and probably he saw it also in > Narcissa's mind. SV: I agree. I want to believe he just said that to find out what Voldemort had planned. I think he hoped to thwart the operation, but to protect himself from being discovered as a spy, he had to do the unbreakable oath. He did not expect a child to have been entrusted with the daunting task of killing such a powerful wizard. Voldemort's plan was to have Draco kill Dumbledore because the headmaster would not expect an attact from a child. Snape had to complete the task because of the unbreakable vow. I know others will say Draco's task was only to get the Deatheaters into the castle. Dumbledore was known to be wrong before about certain things, and possibly Snape's allegience. However, Voldemort's comments in GoF about the missing member who would be dealt with, leads me to believe that Snape really was on Dumbledore's side. SV From staceyv2220 at yahoo.com Fri Jan 13 15:55:13 2006 From: staceyv2220 at yahoo.com (staceyv2220) Date: Fri, 13 Jan 2006 15:55:13 -0000 Subject: Squibs have genes to do magic? In-Reply-To: <43C742CD.7020006@pacificpuma.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146399 Jen Reese wrote: > >Thinking about Mrs. Figg or Filch doing spontaneous magic later in > >life made me wonder if that's possible. I thought the whole point > > of a Squib is that he/she doesn't have magical genes; Even > > immersing themselves in the magical world as Filch does, how > > could they suddenly perform magic? Magic is supposedly due to a > > dominant gene, so it seems like it would be equivalent to > > changing your eye-color, but then I have a mental block about > > genetics. In as far as Mrs. Figg or Filch doing magic, they probably can to an extent. It is implied that they can each talk to cats. Filch ordered the book to teach squibs magic, which wouldn't have been written at all if it were not possible. Neville says he is "almost a Squib." And Mrs. Figg's house smells like cabbage, the same smell Harry notices at the potion shop in Diagon Alley. They cannot do big magic. Mrs. Figg states that she cannot "so much as transfigure a tea bag," but she is certainly trying her hand at potion making. SV From xcpublishing at yahoo.com Fri Jan 13 16:28:57 2006 From: xcpublishing at yahoo.com (Cheryl) Date: Fri, 13 Jan 2006 16:28:57 -0000 Subject: ESE! Snape or not WAS: Re: Cheating Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146400 Amanda writes: >IMO: I do not think that Snape is ESE. Of all the wizards, DD is the one whose word I would trust the most. >1. SS/PS - Countercurse on Quirrell's magic on HP during the game. Helping DD protect the stone with potions obstacle. Helping DD protect the stone would have been in character if he was ESE, but countercursing Quirrell to help Harry doesn't seem like it would help his cover, since DD wouldn't know about it at all unless Snape brought it to his attention. >2. CoS - HP used SS's potions for making 'polyjuice' potion. Well, that's not exactly helping Harry, lol! He just happens to have all that stuff. >3. PoA - Standing in front of HP/RW/HG putting himself at risk of werewolf!Lupin. This one is the biggie for me. >4. GoF - Was right beside DD and ready for helping when HP was with Moody!CrouchJr. with truth potion ready. Yes, but Crouch Jr. wasn't exactly popular with the other DEs... >5. OoP - Continually giving the Order information on LV. As far as we know. >6. HBP - Why woud SS have an argument w/ DD at the edge of the forbidden forest saying 'I want out'. I strongly believe that SS told DD about the UV and did not want to have to go through with it and was arguing with DD on what to do. He is continually trying to get information from Draco as to what he is doing. I think it would take Snape about five seconds to get the truth out of Draco, which is one reason I think he didn't really know about the mission when he was talking to Narcissa. We all know he has a nice little supply of Veritaserum. All he would have to do is bring Draco in for some reason or another - he IS the head of Slytherin, after all - and slip him a little potion. A quick memory modification and Draco is none the wiser. The argument with DD is a huge clue, I think. >7. ??? - ***IMO***: SS and HP will have a run in, and HP will be suprised at the outcome Speaking as a writer, I just think that it's been placed in our laps a bit too obviously. She comes right out in Book Six with Snape on a silver platter. "See? He's evil. Evil evil evil." It's just too pat. I'm not buying it. Nicky Joe From ceridwennight at hotmail.com Fri Jan 13 17:06:25 2006 From: ceridwennight at hotmail.com (Ceridwen) Date: Fri, 13 Jan 2006 17:06:25 -0000 Subject: Cheating In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146401 SV: *(snip)* > He did not expect a child to have been entrusted > with the daunting task of killing such a powerful wizard. > Voldemort's plan was to have Draco kill Dumbledore because the > headmaster would not expect an attact from a child. Snape had to > complete the task because of the unbreakable vow. *(snip)* Ceridwen: I've been thinking about this, since it's been on the list lately. What a horrible thing for Voldemort to do to Dumbledore! Apparently, the plan is for Draco to fail, per both Snape and Narcissa in 'Spinner's End', and to die in the attempt. A punishment on Lucius. Which means that LV apparently envisions Draco pulling his wand on Dumbledore, and Dumbledore having to defend himself by *killing a student*. What a choice for Dumbledore! Talk about the right and the easy! Kill the student in self-defense, keep that student from killing; or, die. Seeing it this way, I'm willing to state that nothing LV does has only one short-term goal, but both an immediate goal (punish Lucius with his son's death in this case) and a far-ranging goal (sink Dumbledore into the pits of guilt and depression in this example). Just a thought. Ceridwen. From kelleyaynn at yahoo.com Fri Jan 13 17:34:09 2006 From: kelleyaynn at yahoo.com (kelleyaynn) Date: Fri, 13 Jan 2006 17:34:09 -0000 Subject: Harry Vanquishing LV without killing him. In-Reply-To: <20060113005022.41524.qmail@web53305.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146402 > Luckdragon: > Before his powers and his supporters LV was simply Tom Riddle. If LV were to lose either his magical ability or if everyone turned on him in unity and no longer feared him he would again become Tom Riddle. This way LV is "vanquished" without dying, and because Harry would be behind this either by reducing LV's powers through the destruction of the horcruxes or by convincing all of the magical community to turn against LV then the prophecy is met. LV would be dead, Tom Riddle would be a muggle ,if he doesn't end his own life, and Harry could get on with Life. Does this make sense. > > Kelleyann: But the prophecy doesn't say Harry only has to "vanquish" Voldemort. The prophecy says "either must DIE (emphasis mine) at the hand of the other." It also says only one can live. So getting rid of Voldemorts powers isn't killing him. I would like to see Harry not kill LV, but not sure how that can happen. Kelleyaynn From foxmoth at qnet.com Fri Jan 13 17:38:47 2006 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Fri, 13 Jan 2006 17:38:47 -0000 Subject: Spies, Lies and Self fullfilling prophecies In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146403 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "justcarol67" wrote: > > kchuplis wrote (asking the same question that arose in my mind as I > read Pippin's post): > > > OK, here is where I get confused....where do Snape and Sirius say > they suspected Lupin of aiding Death Eaters? > > Pippin supplied these quotes from PoA as canon support: > > [Snape:]"It seems --almost impossible--that Black could have entered > the school without inside help. I did express my concerns when you > appointed--" > > and > > > "Not if he thought I was the spy, Peter," said Lupin. "I assume > that's why you didn't tell me, Sirius?" he said casually over > Pettigrew's head. > > > > "Forgive me, Remus," said Black. > > -- PoA ch 19 > > Carol responds: > What the Snape quote illustrates, IMO, is simply Snape's belief > (repeated in the Shrieking Shack) that Lupin is helping Black get into > the school. He believes (understandably) that Black tried to murder > him when they were both sixteen, and like everyone else in the WW, > that Black murdered Pettigrew and twelve Muggles. Pippin: Huh? Sirius Black is the most feared of Voldemort's supporters thought to be at large, everyone thinks Sirius is acting in Voldemort's cause, Snape believes Lupin will help him, and yet you don't think that Snape suspected Lupin of aiding the Death Eaters? There is canon that Snape believed that Harry specifically was in danger from Sirius, besides the "bended knee" passage which you quoted in your post which shows that he knew that Black had betrayed the Potters. "Everyone from the Minister of Magic downward has been trying to keep famous Harry Potter safe from Sirius Black"- PoA ch 14 Are you saying Snape believed that the betrayal of the Potters and the subsequent murder of "thirteen people" had nothing to do with the Death Eaters??? Obviously Snape suspected Lupin of something more than putting old friendships above the safety of students if he thought Lupin would help Black do anything! Carol: > The Lupin/Black exchange, IMO, simply shows that each thought the > other was a spy. Each knew that someone close to the Potters was the > spy; each knew that he himself was not the spy; each underestimated > Peter Pettigrew. That leaves only one suspect apiece: Pippin: The unspoken premise here is that all the other members of the Order had been systematically eliminated and Sirius reluctantly concluded that only Lupin could be the spy. That makes a good story, but what canon supports it? Moody's photo makes it clear that at least to begin with there were any number of people who could have informed Voldemort of the Potter's movements, far too many for Sirius to investigate. In any case, that's not how Sirius thinks. In GoF, he suspected Karkaroff on the basis of his history and character. We don't know that he didn't suspect Lupin for similar reasons, especially since so much of Lupin's history is a blank and his character flaws, though seemingly minor compared to the sadism and xenophobia exhibited by others, are the opposites of the virtues JKR has most praised: standing up to your friends, and courage. Pippin From gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk Fri Jan 13 18:04:51 2006 From: gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk (Geoff Bannister) Date: Fri, 13 Jan 2006 18:04:51 -0000 Subject: July 31 2007 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146404 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Ceridwen" wrote: Geoff: > > Once I have an idea of what has happened, I can then quite happily > work > > through the book wondering how we are going to arrive at this > > conclusion that the last word is "scar" and my membership of > the "Harry > > Will Live" society is still valid. > > Ceridwen: > We know the last word is 'scar' because JKR has said so in more than > one interview. I saw one where she even showed the envelope with the > final chapter in it and said it again (yes, I couldn't resist > watching her on TV, so sue me!). I do think Harry will live. I do > think Voldemort will become some version of Veil!Mort (rather than > Muggle!Mort). Even when I know the destination, I like the process > of getting there. Geoff: Sorry, I didn't make myself totaly clear. What I meant was that I shall work my way through the book - knowing already that "scar" is the last word as we have been told - and wondering how she will steer the narrative to that end. Ceridwen: > And, I like the proposed date. Wouldn't it be fitting? Geoff: Ah, Harry's 27th birthday. He becomes a perfect cube for the third time on that day :-) I think I would prefer 31/07/06 personally..... From newbrigid at yahoo.com Fri Jan 13 16:16:30 2006 From: newbrigid at yahoo.com (Lia) Date: Fri, 13 Jan 2006 08:16:30 -0800 (PST) Subject: Harry Vanquishing LV without killing him. In-Reply-To: <20060113033755.83367.qmail@web53301.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20060113161630.57525.qmail@web31701.mail.mud.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 146405 Luckdragon: > The dark lord will exist no more, but the shell of what he once > was (Tom Riddle) may remain to live out his days a powerless, > souless man. Lia muses: Your use of the word "souless" made something flicker in my brain. I know that the prophecy is worded so that it would appear that one must die at the hand of the other, and I have wondered if the duel in GOF might be a precursor. However, in seeing you use that word, I thought of the dementors... and how Dumbledore told Voldemort that there are some things worse than death. Since POA, the Dementors--and their Kiss--have been mentioned repeatedly. We've seen the Dementors disobey orders and run rampant before. Could they turn on Voldemort, then? Lia, who's aware that this is a farfetched idea and that LV probably doesn't have good memories for Dementors to feed upon, but... From GAP5685 at AOL.com Fri Jan 13 17:12:08 2006 From: GAP5685 at AOL.com (gwen_of_the_oaks) Date: Fri, 13 Jan 2006 17:12:08 -0000 Subject: Voldemort "intentionally" makes Harry a Horcrux! - I've got it! In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146406 Gwen originally wrote: > > This exploding soul-bit and botched soul-partitioning is what > vaporizes LV and destroys the house. > > > Problems with this theory? The biggest contradiction comes from the end of GOF, when LV himself says that he tried to kill Harry (GOF Am. Hardcover pg 652) and that the curse was deflected and rebounded onto him (pg 653). Gwen again: I think I've got it! What if the soul-bit leaving Harry did not vaporize LV, as I originally thought? Then, LV is standing there, everyone dead and his Horcrux failed. He would be angry knowing his Horcrux attempt failed and his soul-bit was lost. In his rage he cuses the destruction. He would *then* have tried to AK Harry. Then what follows falls into place exactly as he states at the end of GOF - the protection that prevented the horcrux from residing in Harry also causes AK to rebound. And the rest is published. So as I said below, the question is why did James have to die. What was it about James that made him such a significant murder? Gwen (Who is quite pleased with her theory now, and thinks it makes perfect sense) From newbrigid at yahoo.com Fri Jan 13 16:38:29 2006 From: newbrigid at yahoo.com (Lia) Date: Fri, 13 Jan 2006 08:38:29 -0800 (PST) Subject: Squibs have genes to do magic? In-Reply-To: <43C742CD.7020006@pacificpuma.com> Message-ID: <20060113163829.66161.qmail@web31701.mail.mud.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 146407 Jazmyn Concolor wrote: > > JK knows NOTHING about genetics. You can not have 'mudbloods' if its a dominant gene. Its got to be a recessive gene if you can have two muggles produce a wizard. Genetics was my area in college, so I know what I am talking about here. JK's idea simply does not work. If Wizard genes were always dominant, there would be NO squibs born to purebred families. Lia says: Aha! I don't know as much as you do about genetics, but I'd always thought that something just didn't seem right. Perhaps, then, the magic gene is kind of...well, a "rogue", as it were? Perhaps it isn't subject to the normal laws of genetics? Lia, who taught fourth grade science but certainly isn't an expert past that From newbrigid at yahoo.com Fri Jan 13 16:23:15 2006 From: newbrigid at yahoo.com (Lia) Date: Fri, 13 Jan 2006 08:23:15 -0800 (PST) Subject: July 31 2007 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20060113162315.52875.qmail@web31715.mail.mud.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 146408 Luckdragon: > Is anyone else planning on reading the last page first? Lia responds: Oh, how tempting it would be....but there's NO WAY I will read ahead! Moreover, I will put a moratorium on internet, TV, and any other communications so that I can find out what happens only through reading. Lia, who--no offense--hates it when the Olympics are across the Atlantic or elsewhere, because they always post the results and she thus finds out the gold medal winners before seeing the actual events! From babyhrndz at yahoo.com Fri Jan 13 18:30:54 2006 From: babyhrndz at yahoo.com (Amanda Shoffner) Date: Fri, 13 Jan 2006 10:30:54 -0800 (PST) Subject: Voldemort "intentionally" makes Harry a Horcrux! - I've got it! In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20060113183054.54687.qmail@web30805.mail.mud.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 146409 Gwen: I think I've got it! What if the soul-bit leaving Harry did not vaporize LV, as I originally thought? Then, LV is standing there, everyone dead and his Horcrux failed. He would be angry knowing his Horcrux attempt failed and his soul-bit was lost. In his rage he cuses the destruction. He would *then* have tried to AK Harry. Then what follows falls into place exactly as he states at the end of GOF - the protection that prevented the horcrux from residing in Harry also causes AK to rebound. Amanda: Just want to say that I think your theory was well thought out. Sounds like that's the most logical, at least until we find out what really is going on in book 7. If this is so, then the rejection of the horcrux left the mark, and the AK is just as stated in the books as not leaving any mark. They tell HP that a scar like that comes from being hit by a curse, they never say that they know for sure that it was the AK, they would not know because nobody has ever survived it before. ~Amanda From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Fri Jan 13 19:37:31 2006 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Fri, 13 Jan 2006 19:37:31 -0000 Subject: Harry's destruction of Voldie (Was: Voldie and the aging process) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146411 Carol earlier: > So Harry *will* have to kill or otherwise destroy LV, body *and* soul, after he's destroyed the Horcruxes that keep LV's soul from leaving the earth and passing beyond the Veil. > > > > Carol, noting that if Voldie could be defeated by old age, there'd be no need for the Chosen One and we'd have no story > Deb responded: > I agree that Harry must find some way to vanquish LV and destroy his capacity to do magic and evil .... I am just not convinced Harry *has to* kill him. One scenario might be ... Harry and friends destroy all of the Horcruxes and then find a way to pursuade a Dementor to administer *the Kiss* to LV. > Hi, Deb. I agree that does not have to kill Voldemort, though I do believe that Voldemort will die through Harry. Turning him into a snake-faced Muggle (or Squib) would not be sufficient, nor would it fulfill the Prophecy. My point in the post was that LV is not going to die from old age or other natural causes, saving Harry the need for destroying him. (How that scenario could be worked into Book 7 in any case, I don't know.) I did say "or otherwise destroy" to leave room for destroying Voldie through the power of Love. I can't see Harry using a Dementor, a symbol of evil in itself, to destroy Voldemort, though I admit it's possible that JKR will go that route. I certainly don't think Harry will use an AK, which is, after all, Unforgiveable and would undo everything JKR has implied through Barty Crouch Sr. about what happens when the opponents of evil adopt the weapons of evil. What I suspect will happen is that Harry will use one of the powers acquired from Voldemort when the AK backfired at Godric's Hollow to destroy Voldemort. "He will mark him as his equal" to me suggests that in giving Harry the scar ("mark"), Voldemort also transferred the power or powers, rare among wizards and until GH almost peculiar to himself, that can be used to destroy him. That's why Harry and only Harry can defeat him, IMO. Harry has the power of Love from his mother's sacrifice combined with highly unusual powers, including Parseltongue (which I'm sure will come into play with Nagini), Legilimency (which is shared by other wizards, including Snape, so it can't be *the* deciding factor, though it may play a role), and, just possibly, the power of possession, which Voldemort has tried and failed to use against him and which Harry does not yet realize that he has. (What better way to get the power of Love inside Voldemort than to use his own power of possession against him?) Somewhere I suggested (in a post I forgot to bookmark) that perhaps Harry could possess Voldemort and force him through the Veil (after destroying the Horcruxes, of course, so that Voldemort is actually dead, like Sirius before him), and then use Sirius's body to step back through the Veil. That way Harry would return Sirius's body to earth so he can finally have a funeral service and a burial (foreshadowed by his return of Cedric's body in GoF), and then slip back into his own body, which is still on the dais outside the Veil, alive and triumphant over evil. At any rate, that scenario would fit the idea that Harry acquired some of LV's *powers* without being a Horcrux (I don't see how he can be a Horcrux, which would have to be destroyed, and still be alive to destroy Voldie.) It would also fit the Prophecy and DD's remarks about the power of Love, and (most important from my perspective), it would not involve the corruption inherent in using an Unforgiveable Curse. And it would explain why Sirius "had to die"--to foreshadow Voldie's fate and give Harry the idea of sending Voldie through the Veil, and to give Harry a means of escape from the Land of the Dead. Carol, not believing for a moment that Deb is "mercenary and ghoulish," though the Dementor scenario definitely qualifies as ghoulish From sunnylove0 at aol.com Fri Jan 13 19:48:05 2006 From: sunnylove0 at aol.com (sunnylove0 at aol.com) Date: Fri, 13 Jan 2006 14:48:05 EST Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Who dies in 7? Message-ID: <29.191b42b.30f95df5@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 146412 Of course we do have the Birthday Theory, that all characters who are wished a Happy Birthday in 2005/2006 are still alive to celebrate. Both Albus Dumbledore and Sirius Black are left off the birthday lists, and so are Tonks and Trelawney. But present are: Neville Longbottom Harry Potter (and JKR has debunked the lost powers theory) All members of the Weasley family (!) Hermione Granger Professor Minerva McGonagall Professor Filius Flitwick Hagrid Severus Snape (there's always Azkaban prison, Alla & Eggplant) Remus Lupin (without Tonks?) Professor Pomona Sprout Draco Malfoy (!) Dobby *************** Amber, who wants to believe in Birthday Theory, though she would hate to see Tonks die. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From agdisney at msn.com Fri Jan 13 20:42:43 2006 From: agdisney at msn.com (agdisney) Date: Fri, 13 Jan 2006 20:42:43 -0000 Subject: Making a Horcrux Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146413 Andie: Hi everyone! I'm re-reading HBP for about the 4th time and I need other opinions on the way I'm understanding this. LV is asking Slughorn about how to make a horcrux, pg 498 US version. "But how do you do it? By an act of evil - the supreme act of evil. by committing murder. Killing rips the soul apart. Ok, let me see if I can make sense of what I'm thinking. There are different ways to kill someone. There is *murder*, when you take a life just to take a life which would rip the soul. But if you are defending yourself or someone else, that IMHO is not *murder* and your soul should not be torn. If a bank robber has a gun & just shoots the teller because they are in his way, then that is murder. If the police or security guard or whoever, shoots the bank robber, to me that is not murder. Or if you see a crime being committed, someone is abducting a child and you are able to stop it by shooting the abductor, that is not murder. When Draco had DD defenseless on the tower, that would have been murder, but when the group is fighting off the DE's in the hall & one of the DE's is killed, that is not murder. When Harry meets up with Voldy he will be defending himself and whoever else is with him. If he AK's him or finds another way to kill him that is not murder that is self defense. Therefore, his soul should not be torn. Which would mean that his soul would remain whole and not be damaged. Does anyone else see it this way? From ceridwennight at hotmail.com Fri Jan 13 21:14:07 2006 From: ceridwennight at hotmail.com (Ceridwen) Date: Fri, 13 Jan 2006 21:14:07 -0000 Subject: Making a Horcrux In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146414 Andie: *(snip)* > When Harry meets up with Voldy he will be defending himself and > whoever else is with him. If he AK's him or finds another way to > kill him that is not murder that is self defense. Therefore, his > soul should not be torn. Which would mean that his soul would remain > whole and not be damaged. > > Does anyone else see it this way? Ceridwen: Yes, I do. Self defense is not murder, but it may stop a murder (of the person defending himself or herself). In Harry's case, he is not only defending himself and others present, but the entire WW in the future. Voldemort alive can only mean more innocent deaths until he is permanently gotten out of the way. So, Harry killing Voldemort would be Harry preventing more murders and senseless killings. Ceridwen. From luckdragon64 at yahoo.ca Fri Jan 13 21:27:50 2006 From: luckdragon64 at yahoo.ca (Bee Chase) Date: Fri, 13 Jan 2006 16:27:50 -0500 (EST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Harry Vanquishing LV without killing him. In-Reply-To: <20060113161630.57525.qmail@web31701.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20060113212750.69904.qmail@web53304.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 146415 Luckdragon: > The dark lord will exist no more, but the shell of what he once > was (Tom Riddle) may remain to live out his days a powerless, > souless man. Lia muses: Your use of the word "souless" made something flicker in my brain. I know that the prophecy is worded so that it would appear that one must die at the hand of the other, and I have wondered if the duel in GOF might be a precursor. However, in seeing you use that word, I thought of the dementors... and how Dumbledore told Voldemort that there are some things worse than death. Since POA, the Dementors--and their Kiss--have been mentioned repeatedly. We've seen the Dementors disobey orders and run rampant before. Could they turn on Voldemort, then? Lia, who's aware that this is a farfetched idea and that LV probably doesn't have good memories for Dementors to feed upon, but... Luckdragon: I once posted a while back that it would be ironic if LV, on the verge of killing Harry, should throw back his head and laugh that cold evil laugh that Harry remembered from the fateful night at Godric's Hollow. The happiness would be too much for the dementors to pass up and they would swoop down and suck out LV's soul. --------------------------------- Find your next car at Yahoo! Canada Autos [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From rh64643 at appstate.edu Fri Jan 13 21:37:01 2006 From: rh64643 at appstate.edu (truthbeauty1) Date: Fri, 13 Jan 2006 21:37:01 -0000 Subject: July 31 2007 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146416 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Luckdragon" wrote: > > Luckdragon: > Is anyone else planning on reading the last page first? > What questions do you want answered above all others. I do not allow myself to read the last page of books. haha It is hard though. With HBP, I just wanted to know soo badly if Ron survives or not. Instead I read the chapter lists and gather what I can. The HBP chapter list told me very clearly that Dumbledore dies. (The White Tomb) But it did not give me any idea that Snape was the HBP or that Draco and Snape were in on killing my man Albus. I like the suspense. But it will be scary starting each chapter wondering who is going to snuff it.( not Ron, not Ron) I am mainly looking for more info about Dumbledore's family, Regulus Black, Lily Potter, and the last horcruxs. I would also like to see if Ginny has any really cool powers and how exactly Harry defeats Volemort. There are other questions, but those are the most buring ones for me. From maria8162001 at yahoo.com Fri Jan 13 20:50:15 2006 From: maria8162001 at yahoo.com (Maria Vaerewijck) Date: Fri, 13 Jan 2006 12:50:15 -0800 (PST) Subject: Cheating In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20060113205015.21872.qmail@web53204.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 146417 Ceridwen: > What a horrible thing for Voldemort to do to Dumbledore! > Apparently, the plan is for Draco to fail, per both Snape > and Narcissa in 'Spinner's End', and to die in the attempt. > A punishment on Lucius. Which means that LV apparently > envisions Draco pulling his wand on Dumbledore, and Dumbledore > having to defend himself by *killing a student*. maria8162001 here: I don't think LV believed that for a second, that Dumbledore is going to kill Draco even in self defense. He knows that Dumbledore will not kill anyone even in self defense unless it's really neccessary. Take the example of their confrontation in the MOM - no matter how he taunted Dumbledore, Dumbledore did not even try to kill him, how much more if it's a child. No, the main purpose of LV for giving the task to Draco to kill Dumbledore, is really to punish Lucius as you have said. Lucius failed him twice, first the diary and second is his failure to get the prophecy from Harry. LV knows Draco is going to fail and be killed, but, not because he will be killed by Dumbledore or any from the Order, but by LV himself or by the Death Eaters. If Draco fails, LV would have the reason to kill both Draco and Narcissa. But LV didn't count on Narcissa asking Snape's help. maria8162001 From luckdragon64 at yahoo.ca Fri Jan 13 22:37:43 2006 From: luckdragon64 at yahoo.ca (Bee Chase) Date: Fri, 13 Jan 2006 17:37:43 -0500 (EST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Harry Vanquishing LV without killing him. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20060113223743.69996.qmail@web53309.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 146418 > Luckdragon: > Before his powers and his supporters LV was simply Tom Riddle. If LV were to lose either his magical ability or if everyone turned on him in unity and no longer feared him he would again become Tom Riddle. This way LV is "vanquished" without dying, and because Harry would be behind this either by reducing LV's powers through the destruction of the horcruxes or by convincing all of the magical community to turn against LV then the prophecy is met. LV would be dead, Tom Riddle would be a muggle ,if he doesn't end his own life, and Harry could get on with Life. Does this make sense. > > Kelleyann: But the prophecy doesn't say Harry only has to "vanquish" Voldemort. The prophecy says "either must DIE (emphasis mine) at the hand of the other." It also says only one can live. So getting rid of Voldemorts powers isn't killing him. I would like to see Harry not kill LV, but not sure how that can happen. Luckdragon: I think the wording of the prophecy is the key here. You can take it literally or read between the lines. Obviously none of us know for sure how to take it, and I would never want to push my own thoughts on anyone. Lets look at the full prophecy. 'The one with the power to vanquish the Dark Lord approaches ... born to those who have thrice defied him, born as the seventh month dies ... and the Dark Lord will mark him as his equal, but he will have power the Dark Lord knows not ... and either must die at the hands of the other for neither can live while the other survives ... the one with the power to vanquish the Dark Lord will be born as the seventh month dies ...' Maybe I am being too optimistic, but isn't it possible that if the Dark Lord were to lose his powers he would cease to exist as we know him? If he has no magic and no supporters and was no longer feared would he still be The Dark Lord? I believe the death mentioned would be of body if it were Harry to die at LV's hands, but a different kind of death for LV. Reading between the lines I don't believe the prophecy say's "only one can live", there is a difference between "living" and "surviving"; and why would Jo use the word "Vanquish" at all if she mean't kill. Jo uses the word "dies" to demonstrate the ending of the month of July as well, it can also be used to indicate the end of an era, or any significant change in rule or political leadership. I just think the wording is too confusing to be taken at face value. --------------------------------- Find your next car at Yahoo! Canada Autos [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From miles at martinbraeutigam.de Fri Jan 13 23:19:56 2006 From: miles at martinbraeutigam.de (Miles) Date: Sat, 14 Jan 2006 00:19:56 +0100 Subject: Harry Vanquishing LV without killing him. References: Message-ID: <00ea01c61897$de0efb90$14b2a8c0@rechnerchen> No: HPFGUIDX 146419 kelleyaynn wrote: > But the prophecy doesn't say Harry only has to "vanquish" Voldemort. > The prophecy says "either must DIE (emphasis mine) at the hand of > the other." It also says only one can live. So getting rid of > Voldemorts powers isn't killing him. > > I would like to see Harry not kill LV, but not sure how that can > happen. Miles: The prophecy does not contain the word "kill" nor any synonyme for it. I'm quite sure that there is a reason for this - don't you as well? "To die from the hand" is a metaphorical phrasing, so it can be interprated by JKR - I'm quite sure she will do. From miles at martinbraeutigam.de Fri Jan 13 23:29:34 2006 From: miles at martinbraeutigam.de (Miles) Date: Sat, 14 Jan 2006 00:29:34 +0100 Subject: Squibs have genes to do magic? References: <43C742CD.7020006@pacificpuma.com> Message-ID: <00f001c61899$369c1760$14b2a8c0@rechnerchen> No: HPFGUIDX 146420 Jazmyn Concolor wrote: > JK knows NOTHING about genetics. You can not have 'mudbloods' if its > a > dominant gene. Its got to be a recessive gene if you can have two > muggles produce a wizard. Genetics was my area in college, so I know > what I am talking about here. Miles: I think this statement and the discussion about it has no basis in canon or in JKRs statements. We do not know *anything* about the nature of magic in Potterverse. We do not know why people are magical and others are not, we do not know anything about magical "theory" or the nature of spells and their power. JKR doesn't explain, or better: she makes Harry being absolutely uninterested in it. So it's pure speculation to assume that genetics play any role for humans being magic or not. I agree, that genetics of old Mendel won't work with it at all. We could write loads of mails about how it doesn't work, but again, there is no canon support for the existence of anything like genetics in the Potterverse. Miles, who forgot most of what he had to learn about genetics for his university-entrance diploma. Seems to be recessive knowledge. From bartl at sprynet.com Fri Jan 13 23:31:22 2006 From: bartl at sprynet.com (Bart Lidofsky) Date: Fri, 13 Jan 2006 18:31:22 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Squibs have genes to do magic? In-Reply-To: <43C742CD.7020006@pacificpuma.com> References: <43C742CD.7020006@pacificpuma.com> Message-ID: <43C8384A.9000804@sprynet.com> No: HPFGUIDX 146421 Jazmyn Concolor wrote: > JK's idea simply does not work. If Wizard genes were always dominant, > there would be NO squibs born to purebred families. Bart: Would two genes needing to interact with each other work? Bart From DaveH47 at mindspring.com Fri Jan 13 23:33:44 2006 From: DaveH47 at mindspring.com (Dave Hardenbrook) Date: Fri, 13 Jan 2006 15:33:44 -0800 Subject: The "Positively" Final Battle (was: Wording of the Prophecy) In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <9210427609.20060113153344@mindspring.com> No: HPFGUIDX 146422 Tonks wrote: T> Somehow I think it comes down to the only way to overcome Death (the T> Dark Lord) is by Love and the Eternal life that this brings. This T> would be as in the Christian concept of Eternal life thru Christ. as T> opposed to the false eternal life that Tom Riddle seeks. I would T> bet somehow this is what she will get to in the end, in subliminal T> form of course, but how?? Dave: I like your points and ideas, Tonks, and it seems to harken back to the idea I had some time ago (forget now if I ever expressed it here), that the parable that Jo intends to invoke to "leave no doubt that she is a Christian" is not the crucifixion and resurrection, but Armageddon, the Final Battle Between Good and Evil, personified, as you say, in Harry and LV. I had the idea that the seven books (= seven school years) will represent the "Seven Years of Tribulation" that are supposed to precede Christ's Return, and the final Harry/LV showdown will be the Armageddon Battle that will herald the End of the (Wizarding?) World As We Know It (And -- as the song says -- I Feel Fine). Love will then triumph over the Darkness and Christ's (Harry's??) eternal reign will commence. (The other, relatively peripheral idea I had is that Harry might somehow turn into a phoenix, thus getting in the death/resurrection after all, as well as creating a symbol of the eternal love in Harry that will then rule forever. But this is more a longshot, I think.) Anyway, these kind of speculations are interesting -- I do feel Jo has to find a way to give the series true closure... As well as rescue herself from the fate of Arthur Conan Doyle and L. Frank Baum -- condemned for life to appease the "insatiable Oliver Twists" with book after book, _ad infinitum_, about the same damn Universe. :) :) -- Dave From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Fri Jan 13 23:56:36 2006 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Fri, 13 Jan 2006 23:56:36 -0000 Subject: Spies, Lies and Self fullfilling prophecies In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146423 Carol earlier: > > What the Snape quote illustrates, IMO, is simply Snape's belief (repeated in the Shrieking Shack) that Lupin is helping Black get into the school. He believes (understandably) that Black tried to murder him when they were both sixteen, and like everyone else in the WW, that Black murdered Pettigrew and twelve Muggles. > Pippin responded: > Huh? > Sirius Black is the most feared of Voldemort's supporters thought to be at large, everyone thinks Sirius is acting in Voldemort's cause, Snape believes Lupin will help him, and yet you don't think that Snape suspected Lupin of aiding the Death Eaters? Carol responds: Not Death Eaters plural, just *a* Death Eater (or at any rate, a spy, traitor, and murderer)--Lupin's one-time friend, Sirius Black, whose friendship Snape suspects that Lupin values over Black's murderous propensities--and the danger Black supposedly represents to Harry. Snape could be seeing Lupin's weakness, his desire to be liked and his willingness to overlook the misdeeds of his friends (as in "Snape's Worst Memory"), and applying it to this specific instance, rather than seeing Lupin as "aiding the Death Eaters" in some more general sense. (I think Snape is seeing Sirius Black in personal terms as the betrayer of the Potters, whom he, for equally personal reasons, has tried to protect after finding out how LV interprets the Prophecy, and not specifically as a Death Eater or ally of Voldemort. I could be wrong, though; it's possible there's more to Snape's violent antipathy to Black than a personal agenda. He could be assuming that the spy/traitor must have been a Death Eater and he could believe the rumors that Black was LV's most important supporter, but I don't think he does. I think he simply sees him as what Hagrid calls "a murderin' traitor" and as a danger to the Prophecy Boy, Harry Potter. And for personal reasons, he wants to be the one to bring the "murderer" and his werewolf ally to justice. And if he can save Harry and friends in the process, so be it. So, again, I don't see Snape as seeing Lupin aiding Death Eaters in general, "only" aiding and abetting Sirius Black, whom Snape (IMO) sees as Voldemort's spy and agent, the murderer of Peter Pettigrew and twelve Muggles, and a serious threat to Harry Potter (as revealed by Black's muttered remark, quoted in the Daily Prophet, "He's at Hogwarts!"). It's possible that Snape has concluded on the basis of this evidence that Black must be a Death Eater (a loyal DE, not a renegade DE like Snape himself, though surely not LV's right-hand man), but I still don't see how Snape could think that Lupin was aiding Death Eaters (plural). Nor do I think that Snape would assume that Lupin was a DE himself just because he aided his dear friend Sirius, again putting friendship above all else, even if that means becoming an accessory to Harry Potter's murder. Snape's views, based as they are on the belief that Pettigrew is dead, really can't be used as evidence that Lupin aided Death Eaters, singular or plural, unless it can be proven that Sirius Black was a Death Eater, and I don't think we have any such evidence. At most, we have Snape suspecting Lupin of helping Black into the castle based at least in part of false information (Black's conviction for murder and the stories in the Daily Prophet) and in part on his own relationships with MWPP, which seem to confirm his view of Black as a murderer. If Snape was wrong about Black, and the "murderin' traitor" who betrayed the Potters and spied on the Order for a year before that was actually Wormtail, then Snape would be wrong about Lupin "aiding Death Eaters," as you put it. (Thanks for making me think about this, though; I'm beginning to understand Snape's vehement hatred of Lupin in PoA a bit better from the DDM!Snape standpoint, which you surely know I believe in. And I do wonder how Black got into Hogwarts since the Whomping Willow passage doesn't lead into the castle itself. Did he sneak into the sweet shop in dog form? How could he manage that, even with Crookshanks' help? *That* could be evidence for ESE!Lupin, possibly. Anybody have any ideas?) Pippin: > There is canon that Snape believed that Harry specifically was in danger from Sirius, besides the "bended knee" passage which you quoted in your post which shows that he knew that Black had betrayed the Potters. Carol responds: Of course there is. I'm not arguing with this point. I completely agree that Snape thought Harry was in danger from Black, and with good reason, especially after the attack on the Fat Lady. But which "bended knee" passage? I checked upthread and I didn't quote any passage. Not that I'm arguing here. I'm just curious about the passage you're referring to. > Pippin: > Are you saying Snape believed that the betrayal of the Potters and the subsequent murder of "thirteen people" had nothing to do with the Death Eaters??? Carol responds: I absolutely agree that Snape thought Black had murdered thirteen people (twelve Muggles killed because they were in the way and Pettigrew murdered because he knew that Black had betrayed the Potters). I also absolutely agree that Snape thought Harry was in real danger from Black. (See above.) But, no, I don't think Snape would relate either the betrayal or the subsequent murders to the Death Eaters, per se. He would see it as the spy who betrayed the Potters to *Voldemort* (not to the DEs but to LV directly) murdering the person most likely to testify against him (an act of despicable cowardice but self-serving, not connected with the DEs). Again, I think Snape saw Black as a spy, a traitor, a murderer, and now, after twelve years in Azkaban, a homicidal maniac out to murder Harry. But I don't think he was seeing Black as necessarily a Death Eater acting in connection with other Death Eaters. (LV's reasons for wanting to kill Harry Potter would not have been spread around the DEs as a group, IMO. JKR says that even the ultra-loyal Bellatrix didn't know about the Prophecy, and Karkaroff states in the Pensieve chapter of GoF that LV liked to operate in secrecy, withholding information even from the top-ranked DEs.) Snape himself seems to have spied for Dumbledore without being a member of the original Order of the Phoenix. Voldemort's spy's position would logically be analogous to his, a member of the Order working directly for Voldemort as the young Snape was a (repentant) DE working directly for Dumbledore. Or that's how (PoA) Snape would see it, knowing LV's penchant for secrecy. Pippin wrote: > Obviously Snape suspected Lupin of something more than putting old friendships above the safety of students if he thought Lupin would help Black do anything! Carol responds: I'm not sure that I follow you here. Yes, Snape thought that Lupin was aiding and abetting a murderer (Black). How does Snape's (apparently erroneous) view show that he thought Lupin was aiding Death Eaters (plural) or that he thought Lupin was a Death Eater himself? And since Snape's own loyalties are in question (*I* think he's DDM! but I'm not JKR) and he seems to be wrong about Black, how do his suspicions prove that Lupin is ESE!? Carol earlier: > > The Lupin/Black exchange, IMO, simply shows that each thought the other was a spy. Each knew that someone close to the Potters was the spy; each knew that he himself was not the spy; each underestimated Peter Pettigrew. That leaves only one suspect apiece: Pippin: > The unspoken premise here is that all the other members of the Order had been systematically eliminated and Sirius reluctantly concluded that only Lupin could be the spy. That makes a good story, but what canon supports it? Carol responds: The quote from PoA in your earlier post in which each apologizes for suspecting the other, in combination with DD's remark that "someone close to the Potters" was providing information to Voldemort. I think (yes, I'm drawing inference from canon rather than providing additional canon) that the information provided to LV must have been something so secret and personal that only a close friend could have known it. Consequently other Order members, say Sturgis Podmore or Alastor Moody, were eliminated from the pool of suspected spies. Pippin: > In GoF, he [Sirius Black] suspected Karkaroff on the basis of his history and character. We don't know that he didn't suspect Lupin for similar reasons, especially since so much of Lupin's history is a blank and his character flaws, though seemingly minor compared to the sadism and xenophobia exhibited by others, are the opposites of the virtues JKR has most praised: standing up to your friends, and courage. Carol responds: I don't quite follow you. If SB is not a good judge of character and he suspects people for the wrong reasons (a judgment I happen to agree with), how are his suspicions of Lupin evidence that Lupin is ESE!? I would think that the opposite would be the case. He suspected Lupin, but he's usually wrong in his suspicions (Karkaroff didn't put Harry's name in the Goblet of Fire; poor victimized Barty Jr. did), so wouldn't that argument make Black *less* likely to be right in suspecting Lupin as a spy? (He also tells Harry to watch out for Krum, but Krum seems to be a "good guy.") Carol, who agrees with much of what you say but not with its application to Lupin From gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk Sat Jan 14 00:05:18 2006 From: gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk (Geoff Bannister) Date: Sat, 14 Jan 2006 00:05:18 -0000 Subject: The "Positively" Final Battle (was: Wording of the Prophecy) In-Reply-To: <9210427609.20060113153344@mindspring.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146424 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Dave Hardenbrook wrote: Dave: > Anyway, these kind of speculations are interesting -- I do feel Jo > has to find a way to give the series true closure... As well as rescue > herself from the fate of Arthur Conan Doyle and L. Frank Baum -- > condemned for life to appease the "insatiable Oliver Twists" with > book after book, _ad infinitum_, about the same damn Universe. :) :) Geoff: There is a difference though in that Conan Doyle's stories were episodic. Each one stands alone. JKR has already suggested that the last chapter will be an epilogue rounding off where everyone stands. I suspect it will be more like the situations I found myself in when a lot younger and I would be helping out at a Christian holiday centre during the summer. At the end of the three weeks or whatever, we would bid each other goodbye, go off with the wealth of memories we had accumulated over the period and go our own ways, sometimes meeting to remember what went on but realising that the world had moved on. Those were the days my friend, we thought they'd never end.... That will be the closure. The Hogwarts chapters will have ended and all our heroes - at least those who survive the culls threatened by members of this group - will follow their own lives, some together, some separate. That's life, guys. From mgrantwich at yahoo.com Sat Jan 14 00:25:46 2006 From: mgrantwich at yahoo.com (Magda Grantwich) Date: Fri, 13 Jan 2006 16:25:46 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Spies, Lies and Self fullfilling prophecies In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20060114002546.58389.qmail@web53115.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 146425 --- pippin_999 wrote: > Snape believes Lupin will help him, and yet you don't > think that Snape suspected Lupin of aiding the Death Eaters?... > > ...Obviously Snape suspected Lupin of something more than > putting old friendships above the safety of students if he > thought Lupin would help Black do anything! Yes, Snape did. He suspected Lupin would fall in with Black's evil plans (whatever they might be) because Black is a strong personality and Lupin is a spineless wuss. He didn't have to think Lupin was a DE-wanna-be, all he had to do was assume he was weak. As he indicates in HBP when he makes reference to Tonks' new patronus. Magda (who would love it if ESE!Lupin turns out to be true but is sadly not optimistic about it...) __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com From kmruddell at yahoo.com Fri Jan 13 22:11:49 2006 From: kmruddell at yahoo.com (katydid3626) Date: Fri, 13 Jan 2006 22:11:49 -0000 Subject: Who dies in 7? In-Reply-To: <29.191b42b.30f95df5@aol.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146426 Amber wrote: > Of course we do have the Birthday Theory, that all characters who > are wished a Happy Birthday in 2005/2006 are still alive to > celebrate. > > Both Albus Dumbledore and Sirius Black are left off the birthday > lists, and so are Tonks and Trelawney. > Amber, who wants to believe in Birthday Theory, though she would > hate to see Tonks die. katydid: I don't have my books with me... but I do know that Sirius made a point of telling HArry that there were things worth dying for. Dumbledore mentioned to Voldemort in OOTP that there were things worse than death... Both are gone, and I have been searching for other references of people saying anything along that line. I figure they will be the ones to go.... Does anyone have any examples of Harry or any other character saying something along those lines? From lowndes at bigpond.net.au Fri Jan 13 23:59:43 2006 From: lowndes at bigpond.net.au (Marg McKay-Lowndes) Date: Sat, 14 Jan 2006 09:59:43 +1000 Subject: Alarm clock In-Reply-To: <20060113162315.52875.qmail@web31715.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <000b01c6189d$6ccdda40$0100000a@lan> No: HPFGUIDX 146427 MML here: I'm just browsing through my favourite parts of HBP and have noticed the alarm clock on p.46, (Bloomsbury) which is mentioned a few times. Harry repaired it a while back apparently. Does anyone see any significance in this? Why mention that Harry has repaired the clock? Could it have survived the Godric's Hollow debacle and therefore be something which belonged to Godric Gryffindor? Why is it so significant? Especially as it is not the alarm clock which alerts Harry to Dumbledore's arrival, but the street suddenly turning dark as Dumbledore uses the Put-Outer. MML who sometimes has the nickname of 'wooden spoon'. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From luckdragon64 at yahoo.ca Sat Jan 14 01:01:29 2006 From: luckdragon64 at yahoo.ca (Bee Chase) Date: Fri, 13 Jan 2006 20:01:29 -0500 (EST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Alarm clock In-Reply-To: <000b01c6189d$6ccdda40$0100000a@lan> Message-ID: <20060114010129.23315.qmail@web53313.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 146428 MML here: I'm just browsing through my favourite parts of HBP and have noticed the alarm clock on p.46, (Bloomsbury) which is mentioned a few times. Harry repaired it a while back apparently. Does anyone see any significance in this? Why mention that Harry has repaired the clock? Could it have survived the Godric's Hollow debacle and therefore be something which belonged to Godric Gryffindor? Why is it so significant? Especially as it is not the alarm clock which alerts Harry to Dumbledore's arrival, but the street suddenly turning dark as Dumbledore uses the Put-Outer. MML who sometimes has the nickname of 'wooden spoon'. Luckdragon: There is a possibility that James Potter's family/profession had something to do with clocks(or maybe timeturners). This is really a guess on my part for a while now; but the only reference I have to support it is an unusual little tidbit posted on Jo's website. JKR notes on her Website that someone named Harry Potter was a 19thC clockmaker (JKR). Luckdragon, who things there is still a timeturner out there waiting to be put to use. --------------------------------- Find your next car at Yahoo! Canada Autos [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From antoshachekhonte at yahoo.com Sat Jan 14 01:00:41 2006 From: antoshachekhonte at yahoo.com (antoshachekhonte) Date: Sat, 14 Jan 2006 01:00:41 -0000 Subject: July 31 2007 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146429 > Ceridwen: > > And, I like the proposed date. Wouldn't it be fitting? > > Geoff: > Ah, Harry's 27th birthday. He becomes a perfect cube for the third > time on that day :-) > > I think I would prefer 31/07/06 personally..... > Antosha: Well, seeing that she's just started writing the book, and it'll take months just to chop up the TREES to print this next one on, I think this July is out! ;-) Not to get all pragmatic or anything, but I promise you, the book will either come out around US Memorial Day or US Labor Day, since those are the kick-offs for the two largest book-buying seasons, not just in the US, but in the UK and most of the rest of the northern hemisphere. Publishers don't tend to launch books mid-summer, because people will already have done their summer-reading purchasing, and aren't yet buying for school and the holidays. HBP was an unusually LATE launch. But I do like the symbolism. :-) (My vote, btw, is that book 7 will come out in June of 2007, and the OotP film will hit the theatres that November. A year to look forward too, even if the dates aren't particularly resonant!) From lowndes at bigpond.net.au Fri Jan 13 23:59:43 2006 From: lowndes at bigpond.net.au (Marg McKay-Lowndes) Date: Sat, 14 Jan 2006 09:59:43 +1000 Subject: July 31 2007 In-Reply-To: <20060113162315.52875.qmail@web31715.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <001001c6189d$70044d20$0100000a@lan> No: HPFGUIDX 146430 Luckdragon: > Is anyone else planning on reading the last page first? Lia responds: Oh, how tempting it would be....but there's NO WAY I will read ahead! Moreover, I will put a moratorium on internet, TV, and any other communications so that I can find out what happens only through reading. MML here: Around here, many people walk about with their fingers in their ears, and loudly yelling gibberish so that others who have reached the last page will not reveal the secrets. I too am one who will not read the last page first, but will lock myself away at home. I will also need to purchase multiple copies so that all members of my family (I have 3 children) can read the book at the same time. I have found in the past that this prevents family arguments and is the only way to maintain peace in the home. From a_svirn at yahoo.com Sat Jan 14 01:20:13 2006 From: a_svirn at yahoo.com (a_svirn) Date: Sat, 14 Jan 2006 01:20:13 -0000 Subject: Harry Vanquishing LV without killing him. In-Reply-To: <00ea01c61897$de0efb90$14b2a8c0@rechnerchen> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146431 > Miles: > The prophecy does not contain the word "kill" nor any synonyme for it. I'm > quite sure that there is a reason for this - don't you as well? > "To die from the hand" is a metaphorical phrasing, so it can be interprated > by JKR - I'm quite sure she will do. a_svirn: Actually, prophesies tend to be very literal, rather than metaphorical. Take Macbeth, for instance, he interpreted the second prophesy metaphorically and it turned out to be utterly literal. Judging by precedents I'd say that "at the hand of another" will probably mean something quite literal as well From jlnbtr at yahoo.com Sat Jan 14 01:39:59 2006 From: jlnbtr at yahoo.com (Juli) Date: Fri, 13 Jan 2006 17:39:59 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Number 7 (was: July 31 2007) In-Reply-To: <001001c6189d$70044d20$0100000a@lan> Message-ID: <20060114013959.83985.qmail@web53101.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 146432 I particulary like 07/07/07 for the 7th book. Seven is the most magical number, and back in July (month 07) the WotM was "Bridget Wenlock, Famous Arithmancer. First to establish the magical properties of the number seven." Number 7 in the books: There are 7 school years 7 Horcruxes 7 Books Harry is born on the 7th month The PS was kept in vault Seven hundred thirteen A wand is worth 7 galleons 7 players in a quidditch team 7 Weasley kids Gryffindor's common room is in teh 7th floor were seven hundred ways of committing a Quidditch foul Snape's protection of the PS were 7 bottles Lockhart wrote 7 books The Daily Prophet draw is 7 hundred galleons 7 secret passages from Hogwarts to Hogsmeade 7 animagi in the century The TWT was stablished some 7 Hundred years ago Mad-eye's trunk has 7 keyholes Canary Creams are seven Sickles each in GoF Dobby has 7 pairs of socks Unicorns turn white at age 7 The Black Family tree has been in the family for 7 centuries Clause Seven of the Decree states that magic may be used before Muggles in exceptional circumstances Harry got 7 OWLs McLaggen's mom's been married 7 times Juli Aol: jlnbtr Yahoo: jlnbtr --------------------------------- Yahoo! Photos Got holiday prints? See all the ways to get quality prints in your hands ASAP. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From luckdragon64 at yahoo.ca Sat Jan 14 01:51:35 2006 From: luckdragon64 at yahoo.ca (Bee Chase) Date: Fri, 13 Jan 2006 20:51:35 -0500 (EST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Number 7 (was: July 31 2007) In-Reply-To: <20060114013959.83985.qmail@web53101.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20060114015135.58159.qmail@web53307.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 146433 Juli wrote: I particulary like 07/07/07 for the 7th book. Seven is the most magical number, and back in July (month 07) the WotM was "Bridget Wenlock, Famous Arithmancer. First to establish the magical properties of the number seven." Luckdragon: I have to admit that there is a better possibility for that date as it falls on a Saturday, as did the release date for HBP. --------------------------------- Find your next car at Yahoo! Canada Autos [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From h2so3f at yahoo.com Sat Jan 14 01:52:42 2006 From: h2so3f at yahoo.com (h2so3f) Date: Sat, 14 Jan 2006 01:52:42 -0000 Subject: Squibs have genes to do magic? In-Reply-To: <00f001c61899$369c1760$14b2a8c0@rechnerchen> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146434 CH3ed: Actually JKR did write on her site that magic is a dominant gene. "A Squib is almost the opposite of a Muggle-born wizard: he or she is a non-magical person born to at least one magical parent. Squibs are rare; magic is a dominant and resilient gene." from http://www.jkrowling.com/textonly/en/extrastuff_view.cfm?id=19 Jazmyn is right that Jo got it wrong (assuming wizarding genetics follows the same rule as in the real world). If magic is genetically determined, then it must be a recessive trait. CH3ed who doesn't fault Jo for making a boo-boo on the science. She is a marvelous writer nonetheless. :O) From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Sat Jan 14 02:01:02 2006 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Sat, 14 Jan 2006 02:01:02 -0000 Subject: Who dies in 7? In-Reply-To: <29.191b42b.30f95df5@aol.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146435 Amber wrote: > > Of course we do have the Birthday Theory, that all characters who are wished > a Happy Birthday in 2005/2006 are still alive to celebrate. Alla: Yeah, I REALLY like this one. :-) Amber wrote: > Both Albus Dumbledore and Sirius Black are left off the birthday lists, and > so are Tonks and Trelawney. > > But present are: > > Neville Longbottom > > Harry Potter (and JKR has debunked the lost powers theory) > > All members of the Weasley family (!) > > Hermione Granger > > Professor Minerva McGonagall > > Professor Filius Flitwick > > Hagrid > > Severus Snape (there's always Azkaban prison, Alla & Eggplant) > > Remus Lupin (without Tonks?) > > Professor Pomona Sprout > > Draco Malfoy (!) > > Dobby > *************** Alla: Heeee, if that means that Harry is alive and well at the end or as well as possible after fighting final battle in whatever way Jo imagines, I SO have no problem with Snape living. :-) Besides, some punishments for him are SO much more delicious if he is still alive to enjoy them. :-) I am pretty sure that WW is never going to forget for example that Snape is the one who killed Great Albus Dumbledore ( unless one subscribes to the theories that Dumbledore is alive of course OR that Snape was planning to not kill DD, which I don't believe at all), so it is so much more satisfying if Snape is alive for that OR as I said many times, if Harry saves Snape's life, thus effectlively making Snape to have a life debt directly to Harry. In any event, I like this theory and also want to believe it. I also don't think that if this theory is true, it is a given that Tonks will die. Why? She may simply not be important enough as a character to put on the calendar. Kingsley Shacklebolt is not there either, or Arabella Figg or Mundungus or Alastor Moody. Dean Thomas and Seamus are not there either. I am not sure if that necessarily means that all of them will be dead by the end. So maybe JKR just did not pick a date for her. And even though I think it is a possibility that one or more Weasleys will die, I can totally believe that JKR may leave all Weasleys alive and kicking at the end. I think she can pull it off and not to make it cheesy. IMO of course. You know - to show that one pureblood family who has the values JKR approves of, survived bad times unharmed or something like that. JMO of course, Alla From katmac at katmac.cncdsl.com Sat Jan 14 02:06:57 2006 From: katmac at katmac.cncdsl.com (lagattalucianese) Date: Sat, 14 Jan 2006 02:06:57 -0000 Subject: Half blood prince disappointing In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146436 > ... > > > Anyway the next book will have to have a lot more action, and plot > development than HBP had. > > > Harry > La Gatta Lucianese: I felt HPB was not so much disappointing as incomplete. While the first five books, in spite of some connective tissue, were pretty much each one complete unto themselves, ending at a climactic stopping place, HBP left so many things hanging that it really felt like the first half of a two-volume set, particularly the way it ended. We don't know whether Dumbledore is alive or not, we don't know what Snape was up to or where he has gone, and we are left with the tantalizing bit concerning R.A.B. and the false horcrux. It may be that one of JKR's messages is that as one grows up, life becomes less certain, but the book left me with a strong desire to keep reading, just to find out what was going on. From babyhrndz at yahoo.com Sat Jan 14 01:57:19 2006 From: babyhrndz at yahoo.com (Amanda) Date: Sat, 14 Jan 2006 01:57:19 -0000 Subject: Was Voldemort intentionally making HP a horcrux. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146437 >Richard: > There's a hole in your argument where you have Voldemort under > an Unbreakable Vow not to harm Lily, in that it would have > meant that in explicitly killing Lily (whom he gave the chance > to step aside) would have invoked the Vow and thus death. > "dobbyisdumbledore": > I understand your position for reasons against Lily's death/a > Voldemort Unbreakable Vow. > > However, that was rather secondary to the point regarding > intentionally making Harry a Horcrux before he tried to kill him. > Amanda: In regards to making Harry a Horcrux, I think that is where Harry got the mark. In SS/PS, it states that,"A mark like that comes from being touched by an evil curse"..it doesn't say the AK, just 'a curse'. Later on we hear that the AK leaves no marks. IMO, LV went to make HP a horcrux, and when Lilly's sacrafice bounced that off, he tried the AK. The prophesy states that "he will mark him as an equal". LV marked HP as he was making him an equal w/ the horcrux. When it didn't work, he got mad and did the AK, which bounced back again because of the sacrifice of Lilly. Again, all IMO. ~Amanda From stevejjen at earthlink.net Sat Jan 14 03:32:39 2006 From: stevejjen at earthlink.net (Jen Reese) Date: Sat, 14 Jan 2006 03:32:39 -0000 Subject: Squibs have genes to do magic? In-Reply-To: <00f001c61899$369c1760$14b2a8c0@rechnerchen> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146438 Rachel(146396): > JKR has never said that the wizarding gene is dominant. I think it's > pretty clear that it HAS to be recessive for the reasons you put in > your post re squibs and muggle borns. > Miles: > I think this statement and the discussion about it has no basis in > canon or in JKRs statements. We do not know *anything* about the > nature of magic in Potterverse. We do not know why people are > magical and others are not, we do not know anything about > magical "theory" or the nature of spells and their power. > So it's pure speculation to assume that genetics play any role for > humans being magic or not. Jen: Right or wrong, JKR introduced the concept of magic being due to a dominant gene as pointed out by CH3ed in this thread. Next time I'll include the relevant quote so it won't appear to be my own speculation. Personally, I wish she'd left genes out of it. She gave a more vague and probably more defensible answer in the Barnes and Noble interview in 1999 when asked how Muggle-born Hermione could be a witch: "Nobody knows where magic comes from. It is like any other talent. Sometimes it seems to be inherited, but others are the only ones in their family who have the ability." Anyway, my main point got last in the battle of the genes: If Filch or Figg performed magic, wouldn't that make whomever does it a latent witch or wizard rather than a true Squib? JKR said on her website in the Squib section that a Squib is a 'non-magical person'. So a person who could perform magic, even late in life, would not be a Squib. But hey, maybe it doesn't really matter. If JKR isn't sure how magical skill develops, she can do whatever she wants. SV: > In as far as Mrs. Figg or Filch doing magic, they probably can to an > extent. It is implied that they can each talk to cats. Filch > ordered the book to teach squibs magic, which wouldn't have been > written at all if it were not possible. Jen: The Kwikspell course is for witches and wizards who aren't able to perform magic well, not squibs. At least that's what the promotional material says. SV: > And Mrs. Figg's house smells like cabbage, the same smell > Harry notices at the potion shop in Diagon Alley. They cannot do big > magic. Mrs. Figg states that she cannot "so much as transfigure a > tea bag," but she is certainly trying her hand at potion making. Jen: Filch and Figg aren't performing magic. To quote JKR again: "Neither of these characters can perform magic (Filch's Kwikspell course never worked), but they still function within the wizarding world because they have access to certain magical objects and creatures that can help them..." The more I think about it, the more I think Filch is a latent wizard and not a squib. He calls himself a squib in COS, but the fact that he bothered to order the Kwikspell course and it 'didn't work' according to JKR makes me think he might be capable of magic, unlike Figg who is truly a Squib. Jen From shrtbusryder2002 at yahoo.com Sat Jan 14 04:19:41 2006 From: shrtbusryder2002 at yahoo.com (Jason) Date: Sat, 14 Jan 2006 04:19:41 -0000 Subject: July 31 2007 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146440 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "antoshachekhonte" wrote: > > > Ceridwen: > > > And, I like the proposed date. Wouldn't it be fitting? > > > Antosha: > > > > (My vote, btw, is that book 7 will come out in June of 2007, and the > OotP film will hit the theatres that November. A year to look forward > too, even if the dates aren't particularly resonant!) > With the emphasis Rowling put on the importance of the number 7 in HBP, why not release the book on 7/7/07? Jason From stevejjen at earthlink.net Sat Jan 14 04:31:54 2006 From: stevejjen at earthlink.net (Jen Reese) Date: Sat, 14 Jan 2006 04:31:54 -0000 Subject: Cheating In-Reply-To: <20060113205015.21872.qmail@web53204.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146441 > Ceridwen: > > > What a horrible thing for Voldemort to do to Dumbledore! > > Apparently, the plan is for Draco to fail, per both Snape > > and Narcissa in 'Spinner's End', and to die in the attempt. > > A punishment on Lucius. Which means that LV apparently > > envisions Draco pulling his wand on Dumbledore, and Dumbledore > > having to defend himself by *killing a student*. > > maria8162001 here: > I don't think LV believed that for a second, that Dumbledore > is going to kill Draco even in self defense. He knows that > Dumbledore will not kill anyone even in self defense unless it's > really neccessary. No, the main purpose of LV for giving the task > to Draco to kill Dumbledore, is really to punish Lucius as you > have said. LV knows Draco is going to fail and be killed, > but,not because he will be killed by Dumbledore or any from the > Order, but by LV himself or by the Death Eaters. Jen: Voldemort's power is his ability to maneuver people into situations where their hands are tied by their instincts for good actions (or evil actions for a person like Pettigrew). Like in the case of Draco, Voldemort wasn't expecting Draco could put up enough of a fight for Dumbledore to actually have to kill him, but he was manipulating Dumbledore into an impossible situation by using one of his students inside Hogwarts. Like Ceridwen said, the long-term goal was Dumbledore, a goal of Voldemort's probably dating back to the time he first placed Snape at Hogwarts. Voldemort knows Dumbledore will act as 'fools who love act.' He wouldn't ever harm Draco, and more than that, he wants Draco to make the right choice. He can't have a heart-to-heart with Draco and put him in danger. He doesn't want to kick him out of the school and turn him completely to Voldemort's side . Dumbledore knows allowing Draco to stay at Hogwarts is safeguarding him to a certain extent and buys some time, although the down side is he might harm someone else in the process. What's he to do? That's the way Voldemort operates, that's how he ties the hands of good people. maria8162001: > If Draco fails, LV would have the reason to kill both Draco and > Narcissa. But LV didn't count on Narcissa asking Snape's help. Jen: You don't think? I thought that visual of the flames wrapping around Snape's wrists was pretty much vintage Voldemort. I think Voldemort was well aware of what Narcissa was up to and figured he would kill two birds with one stone--Dumbledore, and Snape's humanity, which he regained through Dumbledore's trust. "The Dark Lord always knows!" said Bella in OOTP. I don't think Snape's superb Occlumency was enough to completely fool the greatest Legilimens and dark wizard of the century, even if LV didn't get the entire picture. But Snape was useful to him, placed at Hogwarts, and he used him for his own ends. Jen From AllieS426 at aol.com Sat Jan 14 04:31:33 2006 From: AllieS426 at aol.com (allies426) Date: Sat, 14 Jan 2006 04:31:33 -0000 Subject: Mrs. Figg (Was: Dursleys) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146442 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Steve" wrote: > > We have already had an attack on Hogwarts and Filch > was no where to be seen. He doesn't seem the type to go charging into > battle. Nor does he seem to care about anyone enough to be prompted >to > come to their defense. > Allie: Maybe if Mrs. Norris were in danger during a DE attack? :) From bartl at sprynet.com Sat Jan 14 04:55:05 2006 From: bartl at sprynet.com (Bart Lidofsky) Date: Fri, 13 Jan 2006 23:55:05 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Making a Horcrux In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <43C88429.5040601@sprynet.com> No: HPFGUIDX 146443 agdisney wrote: > Ok, let me see if I can make sense of what I'm thinking. There are > different ways to kill someone. There is *murder*, when you take a > life just to take a life which would rip the soul. But if you are > defending yourself or someone else, that IMHO is not *murder* and > your soul should not be torn. Bart: At some point, a reading of the Ian Fleming short story (which, by the way, has NOTHING to do with the movie of the same name), "A View to A Kill", might be a good idea. Bart From tonks_op at yahoo.com Sat Jan 14 05:00:16 2006 From: tonks_op at yahoo.com (Tonks) Date: Sat, 14 Jan 2006 05:00:16 -0000 Subject: July 31 2007 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146444 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Jason" wrote: > > With the emphasis Rowling put on the importance of the number 7 in HBP, why not release the book on 7/7/07? > Jason Tonks: You are right!! I checked the dates for 2007 and the 7th is a Saturday. And the 31st is not. The books are ALWAY released on a Saturday so that everyone can be at the bookstores at midnight on that Friday, and not on a weeknight. So my bet is also 7-7-7. Tonks_op From kchuplis at alltel.net Sat Jan 14 05:45:18 2006 From: kchuplis at alltel.net (Karen) Date: Fri, 13 Jan 2006 23:45:18 -0600 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Voldie and the aging process (Was: Half-Blood Prince disappointing) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146445 On Thursday, January 12, 2006, at 10:43 PM, Deb wrote: > > I agree that Harry must find some way to vanquish LV and destroy his > capacity to do magic and evil .... I am just not convinced Harry *has > to* kill him. One scenario might be ... Harry and friends destroy all > of the Horcruxes and then find a way to pursuade a Dementor to > administer *the Kiss* to LV. His last soul fragment is gone... along > with his memory and - apparantly from hints given in canon - his > ability to do magic. In this manner Harry does not have to kill - > thereby avoiding the splitting of his own soul yet still reducing LV > to Muggle!Mort.? Just how one could pursuade a Dementor to *Kiss* LV > is beyond my capacity to imagine cuz it is such a disgusting image > (IMO)... though I have also wondered what would? happen if a Dementor > *Kissed* LV before all the Horcruxes were destroyed... would the > Dementor only get that bit of soul left in LV's current body? Or would > the power of the *Kiss* be so strong as to suck all of the soul bits > from their hiding places and down the maw of the Dementor?? > > I think this is quite brilliant and quite possibly does have something to do with victory over LV. The "Kiss" has been heavily featured. Interesting that you have something ready made to zero in on souls; when the denouement of the entire piece resides in hunting soul pieces in particular. One of our big sticking points with book 7 is howinell can Harry do it? After all, he's refused to tell MacGonnagall about the horcruxes so I'm assuming he isn't going to let any of the Order in on it. Harry does not have Dumbledorian capabilities for all his being the key to LV. Since souls appear to be the thing that make Dementors snack happy, he's got a built in soul vacuum if he can convince a dementor to come along for the ride. Which, tall order that it may seem, seems less tall than learning a bajillion magic skills to get rid of horcruxes. Now, getting the items, that's tricky too, but I have to agree here that somehow the dementors have got to come into play for this. I'm quite certain we don't know enough about them right now to figure out how, but it's really the only way I can see Harry destroying horcruxes to even get to the last bit of LV. Had another thought, though I am not sure how it plays in. We know Hermione mentions that few wizards have logic, but we know Snape does since he set up the logic part of the protection for the SS/PS. Will Snape convince Harry of his allegiance through logic? Just more thoughts to toss into the pot. kchuplis From gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk Sat Jan 14 07:44:51 2006 From: gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk (Geoff Bannister) Date: Sat, 14 Jan 2006 07:44:51 -0000 Subject: Harry Vanquishing LV without killing him. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146446 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "a_svirn" wrote: a_svirn: > Actually, prophesies tend to be very literal, rather than > metaphorical. Take Macbeth, for instance, he interpreted the second > prophesy metaphorically and it turned out to be utterly literal. > Judging by precedents I'd say that "at the hand of another" will > probably mean something quite literal as well Geoff: Yes, but with respect, Shakespeare also gives us the other side of the coin: THIRD APPARITION: .... Macbeth shall never vanquish'd be, until Great Birnam Wood, to high Dunsinane Hill Shall come against him. (The Tragedy of Macbeth, Act IV, Scene I) The way in which Shakespeare worked this prophecy out - as a bit of a con - absolutely incensed J.R.R.Tolkien and was a factor in his creation of the Ents. An interesting point which crossed my mind when typing this quote was the use of "vanquish'd".... Familiar? From gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk Sat Jan 14 07:53:49 2006 From: gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk (Geoff Bannister) Date: Sat, 14 Jan 2006 07:53:49 -0000 Subject: Half blood prince disappointing In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146447 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "lagattalucianese" wrote: La Gatta Lucianese: > > I felt HPB was not so much disappointing as incomplete. While the > first five books, in spite of some connective tissue, were pretty > much each one complete unto themselves, ending at a climactic > stopping place, HBP left so many things hanging that it really felt > like the first half of a two-volume set, particularly the way it > ended. Geoff: Precisely. If you look at JKR's website under "News", the 19th item is headed "Progress onBook Six" and is dated 15/03/2004, you will find this is the way she has tended to see it. From ceridwennight at hotmail.com Sat Jan 14 12:56:21 2006 From: ceridwennight at hotmail.com (Ceridwen) Date: Sat, 14 Jan 2006 12:56:21 -0000 Subject: Voldie and the aging process (Was: Half-Blood Prince disappointing) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146448 kchuplis: > I think this is quite brilliant and quite possibly does have something > to do with victory over LV. The "Kiss" has been heavily featured. > Interesting that you have something ready made to zero in on souls; > when the denouement of the entire piece resides in hunting soul pieces > in particular. *(snip)* > Since souls appear to be the thing that make Dementors snack > happy, he's got a built in soul vacuum if he can convince a dementor to > come along for the ride. Which, tall order that it may seem, seems less > tall than learning a bajillion magic skills to get rid of horcruxes. > Now, getting the items, that's tricky too, but I have to agree here > that somehow the dementors have got to come into play for this. I'm > quite certain we don't know enough about them right now to figure out > how, but it's really the only way I can see Harry destroying horcruxes > to even get to the last bit of LV. Ceridwen: You've just made me think of Peter Pan. At least, the Disney version. The crocodile had a taste of Cpt. Hook's hand, and now follows him around wanting more. I just imagined the theoretical Companion!Dementor getting a taste of a tiny part of LV's soul from the first Horcrux it de-souls, and liking it so much that it's after the rest of the soul piece by piece, until the final confrontation, when the home soul is presented in all its tasty glory. I like that. Puts a children's story quality to the whole thing. But, I don't think HRH can trust a Dementor not to suck their souls while they sleep, or if the Horcrux hunt goes too slow and the thing gets hungry. I think the MoM compromised itself by using Dementors to control prisoners. I believe it is one of those 'pacts with the devil' sorts of arrangements, and that only grief and further compromise of Harry's innocence and goodness can come from it. But, Dementor as Crocodile is amusing to think about. Thanks for the thought! Ceridwen. From ceridwennight at hotmail.com Sat Jan 14 13:14:19 2006 From: ceridwennight at hotmail.com (Ceridwen) Date: Sat, 14 Jan 2006 13:14:19 -0000 Subject: Cheating In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146449 Jen: > Voldemort's power is his ability to maneuver people into > situations where their hands are tied by their instincts for good > actions (or evil actions for a person like Pettigrew). Like in the > case of Draco, Voldemort wasn't expecting Draco could put up enough > of a fight for Dumbledore to actually have to kill him, but he was > manipulating Dumbledore into an impossible situation by using one of > his students inside Hogwarts. Like Ceridwen said, the long-term goal > was Dumbledore, a goal of Voldemort's probably dating back to the > time he first placed Snape at Hogwarts. Ceridwen: Voldemort's blind spot is that he assumes everyone else feels the same way he does. He's afraid of death. It doesn't matter to him that Dumbledore said there are worse things. He would think that, deep down, when actually confronted with Death, Dumbledore would want to live. This blind spot is why he doesn't trust his DEs - he wouldn't trust himself if the roles were reversed. He uses his ability to manipulate people, to stave off a coup in the DE ranks, and to place people into untenable situations. Other than his blind spot, though, he does know his enemies' weaknesses. And Dumbledore's is his students. Jen: > Voldemort knows Dumbledore will act as 'fools who love act.' He > wouldn't ever harm Draco, and more than that, he wants Draco to make > the right choice. He can't have a heart-to-heart with Draco and put > him in danger. He doesn't want to kick him out of the school and > turn him completely to Voldemort's side . Dumbledore knows allowing > Draco to stay at Hogwarts is safeguarding him to a certain extent > and buys some time, although the down side is he might harm someone > else in the process. What's he to do? That's the way Voldemort > operates, that's how he ties the hands of good people. Ceridwen: A case of Voldemort knowing his enemy. Dumbledore's weakness is also his strength, his ability to act as 'fools who love act'. Dumbledore trusts the good side of people and the higher human nature. He was probably a fool not to be more hands-on with Tom Riddle among others, therefore in Voldemort's mind, he *always* acts the fool when he trusts. And, it is a risk. It didn't work with TR, and Draco did put others into danger during his attempts against DD's life. Knowing this sort of thing would go on had to be difficult for Dumbledore. He was Voldemort's victim the entire year. > > maria8162001: > > If Draco fails, LV would have the reason to kill both Draco and > > Narcissa. But LV didn't count on Narcissa asking Snape's help. > > Jen: You don't think? I thought that visual of the flames wrapping > around Snape's wrists was pretty much vintage Voldemort. I think > Voldemort was well aware of what Narcissa was up to and figured he > would kill two birds with one stone--Dumbledore, and Snape's > humanity, which he regained through Dumbledore's trust. "The Dark > Lord always knows!" said Bella in OOTP. I don't think Snape's superb > Occlumency was enough to completely fool the greatest Legilimens and > dark wizard of the century, even if LV didn't get the entire > picture. But Snape was useful to him, placed at Hogwarts, and he > used him for his own ends. Ceridwen: I completely and totally agree. Again, Voldemort's manipulation coming into play, and his *trust* in his own distrust of his people. *Of course* Narcissa will run to Snape for help. He's an old family friend, and he's on-site at Hogwarts where the mission is supposed to take place. He's a more experienced DE, whether or not he slithers out of things. And there is apparently enough of a friendship or obligation between Snape and the Malfoys, which Narcissa played on by mentioning his friendship with Lucius and Snape being Draco's favorite teacher. With LV's distrust, he probably didn't buy Snape's story completely whether or not he could sense a problem through Legilimency. And he does know human nature enough to know that a mother will more than likely go for help for her child. And now, neither Snape nor Draco are useful. LV might keep them around for window dressing, but they lost their usefulness the minute they had to leave Hogwarts. IMO, if they go back to LV, they're treading on thin ice. I like the phrase, "...and Snape's humanity, which he regained through Dumbledore's trust." So very true! Dumbledore's acting like 'fools who love act' restores the humanity that Voldemort strips from his followers. Following LV makes one less than they could have been; following Dumbledore allows one to see potential. Ceridwen. From vuurdame at xs4all.nl Sat Jan 14 14:05:56 2006 From: vuurdame at xs4all.nl (festuco) Date: Sat, 14 Jan 2006 14:05:56 -0000 Subject: Half-Blood Prince disappointing In-Reply-To: <20060112115358.30474.qmail@web53206.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146450 > Rememeber in the Order of the Phoenix when Dumbledore told Voldy > that there are other ways of destroying a man? I guess what he > means then is by stripping Voldy of his powers. What could be > more worse than death for a wizard than being alive and without > power/magic and live like a muggle? Can you imagine Voldy living > like a muggle again? Much worse than before he went to Hogwarts > because then in the end he would not have any power or any > magical ability anymore. Just a thought and I would go for it the > JKR will make an ending like this. > :} My thougts exactly. And then the Dark Lord will be vanquished, and there is just an old squib named Tom Riddle. Gerry From miles at martinbraeutigam.de Sat Jan 14 17:08:18 2006 From: miles at martinbraeutigam.de (Miles) Date: Sat, 14 Jan 2006 18:08:18 +0100 Subject: Squibs have genes to do magic? References: Message-ID: <006a01c6192d$1f034ad0$14b2a8c0@rechnerchen> No: HPFGUIDX 146451 > Miles: > I think this statement and the discussion about it has no basis in > canon or in JKRs statements. We do not know *anything* about the > nature of magic in Potterverse. We do not know why people are > magical and others are not, we do not know anything about > magical "theory" or the nature of spells and their power. > So it's pure speculation to assume that genetics play any role for > humans being magic or not. > Jen: Right or wrong, JKR introduced the concept of magic being due to > a dominant gene as pointed out by CH3ed in this thread. Next time I'll > include the relevant quote so it won't appear to be my own > speculation. Miles: Facing this, I have to apologise to those who discussed "magic genes" and to blame JKR instead ;). Really, her weak point is the lack of a theoretical background for Potterverse. She is working very careful with the story she wants to tell, including plot details. But unlike other fantasy writers (like Tolkien) she never cared very much about a background that is not an explicit part of the books. We came across several .... well, strange details like "spells are Latin" or wizards who accept the borders of Muggle countries (wizards of Liechtenstein...). Anyway, this is bad for fanfic writers and surgical readers like Redhen. I just enjoy the books, so there is some intellectual joy to find and discuss JKRs mistakes like this "dominant genes" absurdity (we all like to be smarter than other people, don't we?), but for me it is just a footnote and no major defect of the Harry Potter series. Miles From bboyminn at yahoo.com Sat Jan 14 18:11:22 2006 From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Sat, 14 Jan 2006 18:11:22 -0000 Subject: Squibs have genes to do magic? In-Reply-To: <43C8384A.9000804@sprynet.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146452 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Bart Lidofsky wrote: > > Jazmyn Concolor wrote: > > JK's idea simply does not work. If Wizard genes were always > > dominant, there would be NO squibs born to purebred families. > > Bart: > Would two genes needing to interact with each other work? > > Bart > bboyminn: I think we are looking at the genetic aspect a little too closely. If there ever was an area that needed to be generalized, this is probably it. So, let's ask ourselves from a more practical stand point if it is possible for a genius or a retarded person to occur in a family of people with normal intelligence? It would seem that both these event do occur. In a sense, I see magic as a form of genius, although I admit that's not a perfect illustration. Once genius occurs in a family, it is more likely that the children of that genius will also be geniuses. I think that is the model JKR is refering to when she says that magic is 'dominant and resilient'. She is saying that once magic assets itself, it is most likely to occur in the children of magic people. It's not all pure random chance. Another example, the children of two blonds are most likely to have blond hair, but that doesn't eleminate the possibility of some of their children having brown hair. So, in a general sense, the obvious aspects of genetics don't hold true. On a superficial level apparent genetics are filled with deviation. Two small people produce a large strapping son. Two people of moderate appearance produce an off-spring of exceptional beauty. Again, my point here is what seems to be obvious genetics, doesn't alway hold true. Deviations from the obvious do hold true. On the other hand, more often, big parents produce big kids. Blond parents produce blond kids. Magic parents produce magic kids, accept for the rare deviation that produces a Squib. But, in a sense, a Squib is like a retarted kid; it happens, but unless there is an extremely high genetic predisposition, it is a rare occurance. Just as it is possible for ordinary parents to produce an extraordinary genius of a kid, it is possible for muggles to produce a magic person. Most likely this is either random chance, or there is some magical genetics lurking in their past that had been dormant for a several generation. >From one perspective, we all have the genes necessary for genius, it is just a matter of whether they are switched on or not. We all have the genes for many diseases the plague mankind, but in most of us, those genes are not switched on. So, while I may not know the details of clinical genetics, it seems that there is some reasonable foundation in a more general view of genetics for these things to occur. Just a few thoughts. Steve/bboyminn From bboyminn at yahoo.com Sat Jan 14 18:32:04 2006 From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Sat, 14 Jan 2006 18:32:04 -0000 Subject: Alarm clock In-Reply-To: <000b01c6189d$6ccdda40$0100000a@lan> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146453 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Marg McKay-Lowndes" wrote: > > MML here: > > I'm just browsing through my favourite parts of HBP and have > noticed the alarm clock on p.46, (Bloomsbury) which is mentioned > a few times. Harry repaired it a while back apparently. Does > anyone see any significance in this? ... bboyminn: I think you may be looking to deeply for something that is not there. First ask yourself where would Harry get an alarm clock at the Dursleys. They seem to give him the absolute minimum 'stuff' they can get away with. They are not likely to run out and buy Harry a clock, and they are not likely nice enough to give him an old clock when they replaced one. So, Harry found an old discarded clock and fixed it. I suspect this may be JKR responding to questions that were asked surrounding Harry having a wristwatch in Goblet of Fire. Where would Harry get a watch? How could a boy who is clothed in hand-me-downs with few if any possessions and no pocket money come up with a working wristwatch. Well, we can specualate on the answer. Perhaps he found it in a drawer now that he is in Dudley's spare room. Or maybe he found a old discarded watch and repaired it. Rather than open the door to more specuation, JKR simply started with an explanation that explains how Harry managed to have an alarm clock. He found a discarded alarm clock and repaired it. If this were the 1,000 year old alarm clock of Godric Gryffindor, I'm pretty sure Vernon would have sold it to the antique shop ages ago. So, I think it is what it seems, an old disgarded alarm clock that Harry salvaged and repaired. Just a thought. Steve/bboyminn From vuurdame at xs4all.nl Sat Jan 14 18:45:33 2006 From: vuurdame at xs4all.nl (festuco) Date: Sat, 14 Jan 2006 18:45:33 -0000 Subject: Dark God Re: Wording of the Prophecy In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146454 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Tonks" wrote: > Here is the first part of "Charge of the Dark God": In Wicca one of the most important sacred texts is the Charge of the Goddess. It is a text which originates from Crowley and which is adapted and revised (and made much more beautiful) by Doreen Valiente. She never wrote a Charge of the God, but there are many parralel pieces written by others. I did some googling and this text is by Chtistopher Hatton. What is important here is that Death is not seen as something bad, but as a necessary part of the circle of death and rebirth which gives people the opportunity for spititual growth. Not something LV would be able to see. So I don't think this will give any clues to the prophecy, and I'm fairly sure JKR did not use this, because 1) this is an unknown text, even if you are Wiccan, so almost no one would be able to have fun with the clues. 2) When she uses occult material it is clear she knows what she is writing about, though she uses it in her own way and she does not believe in it. Interpteting this text the way you do, makes clear that -sorry - you don't understand it at all. The text itself is inspired by The Song of Amergin, a very well known rext from Irish mythology. Thanks for the text b.t.w. I love it. Gerry From jazmyn at pacificpuma.com Sat Jan 14 19:16:35 2006 From: jazmyn at pacificpuma.com (Jazmyn Concolor) Date: Sat, 14 Jan 2006 11:16:35 -0800 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Squibs have genes to do magic? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <43C94E13.9040302@pacificpuma.com> No: HPFGUIDX 146455 Steve wrote: > >On the other hand, more often, big parents produce big kids. Blond >parents produce blond kids. Magic parents produce magic kids, accept >for the rare deviation that produces a Squib. But, in a sense, a Squib >is like a retarted kid; it happens, but unless there is an extremely >high genetic predisposition, it is a rare occurance. > > > Squibs are not rare. Its noted (somewhere in the books) that more squibs are born to purebred families. Though I bet the Malfoy's would have killed off any born in their family. Even Ron mentions having a relitive who is a Squib. One of the reasons the purebred families are dying out, other then marrying non-purebreds is because they are having squib children. Why do you think Neville's grandmother was so concerned with knowing he was magical that they would drop him out a window? I might hazard a guess that DE purebred families drop their kids out windows and just let the squibs hit the ground. Its not like human rights means a thing to them... Jazmyn From bartl at sprynet.com Sat Jan 14 20:02:22 2006 From: bartl at sprynet.com (Bart Lidofsky) Date: Sat, 14 Jan 2006 15:02:22 -0500 Subject: Good vs. Evil In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <43C958CE.3050904@sprynet.com> No: HPFGUIDX 146456 Ceridwen: > Voldemort's blind spot is that he assumes everyone else feels the > same way he does. He's afraid of death. It doesn't matter to him > that Dumbledore said there are worse things. He would think that, > deep down, when actually confronted with Death, Dumbledore would want > to live. This blind spot is why he doesn't trust his DEs - he > wouldn't trust himself if the roles were reversed. He uses his > ability to manipulate people, to stave off a coup in the DE ranks, > and to place people into untenable situations. Bart: That is, of course, a major theme in fictional works of Good vs. Evil; the major disadvantage of the forces of Evil (note the capital letters) is their inability to understand the forces of Good, while the forces of Good can understand the forces of Evil. For example, in Lord of the Rings, Sauron could have easily won, if he had considered that his enemies were going to destroy the One Ring; he could not even envision someone who would be able to fight its temptation. Lord Voldemort gave Lily the choice to live, because he was incapable of imagining her making the choice to die. Voldemort probably considers "love" to be in the sense of "lust"; a selfish desire to own something, rather than the selfless desire to consider something or someone else greater than one's self. Regardless of what else happens in Book 8, I am certain that this will be the key to Voldemort's eventual defeat. Ceridwen: > Other than his blind spot, though, he does know his enemies' > weaknesses. And Dumbledore's is his students. Bart: Yes, and no. He certainly knows his enemies' concerns. But he is incapable of imagining how far they will go in the name of these concerns. Bart From bartl at sprynet.com Sat Jan 14 20:27:57 2006 From: bartl at sprynet.com (Bart Lidofsky) Date: Sat, 14 Jan 2006 15:27:57 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Squibs have genes to do magic? In-Reply-To: <006a01c6192d$1f034ad0$14b2a8c0@rechnerchen> References: <006a01c6192d$1f034ad0$14b2a8c0@rechnerchen> Message-ID: <43C95ECD.30708@sprynet.com> No: HPFGUIDX 146457 Miles wrote: > Anyway, this is bad for fanfic writers and surgical readers like Redhen. I > just enjoy the books, so there is some intellectual joy to find and discuss > JKRs mistakes like this "dominant genes" absurdity (we all like to be > smarter than other people, don't we?), but for me it is just a footnote and > no major defect of the Harry Potter series. Bart: Or, the term "dominant" is not used in the biological sense of the term; it may be used more colloquially, meaning a "very strong trait". We only see a small section of the WW. For example, there has been no discussion of magical higher education, except by implication (notably, Tonks implies that there is some sort of training for Aurors). In addition, there doesn't seem to be any indication of what magic IS in the first place. Most of the teaching below NEWT level seems to be practical applications, although Arithmancy may have some theory attached. Yet, Fred & George's accomplishments would not be doable if some theory weren't being taught. I strongly suspect that JKR had no idea how much scrutiny her books would receive when she first planned them out. Bart From miles at martinbraeutigam.de Sat Jan 14 20:43:44 2006 From: miles at martinbraeutigam.de (Miles) Date: Sat, 14 Jan 2006 21:43:44 +0100 Subject: Squibs have genes to do magic? References: <006a01c6192d$1f034ad0$14b2a8c0@rechnerchen> <43C95ECD.30708@sprynet.com> Message-ID: <009f01c6194b$373a0a30$14b2a8c0@rechnerchen> No: HPFGUIDX 146458 Bart Lidofsky wrote: > In > addition, there doesn't seem to be any indication of what magic IS in > the first place. Most of the teaching below NEWT level seems to be > practical applications, although Arithmancy may have some theory > attached. Yet, Fred & George's accomplishments would not be doable if > some theory weren't being taught. Miles: There is one tiny piece of "theory" concerning antidotes in HBP ch 18, Golpalott's Third Law: "The antidote for a blended poison will be equal to more than the sum of the antidotes for each of the separate components" I'm afraid JKR wanted to present us a statement that's hardly understandable - both Harry and Ron don't understand it, only Hermione does. But come on - they are sixteen, both Harry and Ron are intelligent above the average, so why don't they understand this? I did when I read it the first time, and I think most readers did as well. Again, lack of theoretical background - JKR is a skilled writer, so why didn't she succeed to find something more impressive? She couldn't want to let us think that Harry and Ron are as dull as Crabbe and Goyle? Miles From bartl at sprynet.com Sat Jan 14 20:52:12 2006 From: bartl at sprynet.com (Bart Lidofsky) Date: Sat, 14 Jan 2006 15:52:12 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Squibs have genes to do magic? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <43C9647C.8090107@sprynet.com> No: HPFGUIDX 146459 Steve wrote: > So, let's ask ourselves from a more practical stand point if it is > possible for a genius or a retarded person to occur in a family of > people with normal intelligence? It would seem that both these event > do occur. Bart: Mental retardation is seldom genetic; FAR more often (when I worked with United Cerebral Palsy, the figure often given was 95% of the time), it is due to insufficient oxygen during gestation or birth. Genius, as well, seems to be more connected with the level of stimulus given in the early growing years than genetics, although many parents, in attempting to stimulate their children, actually create a stimulationally impovershed environment. Steve: > Another example, the children of two blonds are most likely to have > blond hair, but that doesn't eleminate the possibility of some of > their children having brown hair. Bart: Actually, for the most part, it does. Blond is a recessive gene. If two parents have blond hair, it means they do not have the gene for brown hair. The only way a child of theirs can have brown hair is by mutation. Consider, one magic gene pair, dominant. We will call the magic version W for Wizard/witch, and the non-magic M for muggle. Therefore, anybody with WW or WM will be a wizard. This means that there are 3 different kinds of wizard-witch marriages: WM-WM, WW-WM, and WW-WW. Now, let's look at the children: WM-WM: WW, WM, WM, MM. One out of 4 will be a squib. WW-WM: WW, WM, WM, WM. All will be magical. WW-WW: WW, WW, WW, WW. All will be magical. Bringing in Magic/Muggle marriages, we have WW-MM, and WM-MM. WW-MM: All children will be WM. WM-MM: WM, WM, MM, MM: half the children will be squibs. Therefore, if magic were a single, dominant gene, there would be a good proportion of squibs being born. However, if it were a recessive gene, then ALL wizards would be WW, but unless a wizard marries a WM muggle (WM's would not be magical), all the children would be squibs. On the other hand, if a WM muggle marries another WM muggle, one out of 4 children would be magical. None of this fits in with JKR's statements. Therefore, one must either assume that magic is not based on a single gene pair, or that there are other forces at work. Now, for example, it could be that there is a non-random factor in magical matings; that it is biologically recessive, but that the M genes make the sperm and egg much more likely to combine. We have not been told what happens if two squibs marry, although one might assume that it would not be that an uncommon occurrance (considering the relative isolation of squibs). Now, if there are two gene pairs involved, it gets much more complicated. However, given the Statute of Secrecy, we don't even know how people from the Wizarding World commonly meet and marry muggles anyway. Unfortunately, the most likely theory is that JKR never really thought it through. Bart From bartl at sprynet.com Sat Jan 14 21:09:02 2006 From: bartl at sprynet.com (Bart Lidofsky) Date: Sat, 14 Jan 2006 16:09:02 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Squibs have genes to do magic? In-Reply-To: <009f01c6194b$373a0a30$14b2a8c0@rechnerchen> References: <006a01c6192d$1f034ad0$14b2a8c0@rechnerchen> <43C95ECD.30708@sprynet.com> <009f01c6194b$373a0a30$14b2a8c0@rechnerchen> Message-ID: <43C9686E.3040804@sprynet.com> No: HPFGUIDX 146460 Miles wrote: > Bart Lidofsky wrote: >>In >>addition, there doesn't seem to be any indication of what magic IS in >>the first place. Most of the teaching below NEWT level seems to be >>practical applications, although Arithmancy may have some theory >>attached. Yet, Fred & George's accomplishments would not be doable if >>some theory weren't being taught. > > Miles: > There is one tiny piece of "theory" concerning antidotes in HBP ch 18, > Golpalott's Third Law: Bart: But that's NEWT level. > "The antidote for a blended poison will be equal to more than the sum of the > antidotes for each of the separate components" > > I'm afraid JKR wanted to present us a statement that's hardly > understandable - both Harry and Ron don't understand it, only Hermione does. > But come on - they are sixteen, both Harry and Ron are intelligent above the > average, so why don't they understand this? I did when I read it the first > time, and I think most readers did as well. > > Again, lack of theoretical background - JKR is a skilled writer, so why > didn't she succeed to find something more impressive? She couldn't want to > let us think that Harry and Ron are as dull as Crabbe and Goyle? Bart: Or, it's an indicator that I was right; they DON'T teach theory below the NEWT level, so that even basic concepts like this are considered to be overly complex. Bart From foxmoth at qnet.com Sat Jan 14 21:53:54 2006 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Sat, 14 Jan 2006 21:53:54 -0000 Subject: Spies, Lies and Self fullfilling prophecies In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146462 > Pippin responded: > Huh? > Sirius Black is the most feared of Voldemort's supporters thought to be at large, everyone thinks Sirius is acting in Voldemort's cause, Snape believes Lupin will help him, and yet you don't think that Snape suspected Lupin of aiding the Death Eaters? Carol responds: Not Death Eaters plural, just *a* Death Eater (or at any rate, a spy, traitor, and murderer)--Lupin's one-time friend, Sirius Black, whose friendship Snape suspects that Lupin values over Black's murderous propensities--and the danger Black supposedly represents to Harry. Snape could be seeing Lupin's weakness, his desire to be liked and his willingness to overlook the misdeeds of his friends (as in "Snape's Worst Memory"), and applying it to this specific instance, rather than seeing Lupin as "aiding the Death Eaters" in some more general sense. (I think Snape is seeing Sirius Black in personal terms as the betrayer of the Potters, whom he, for equally personal reasons, has tried to protect after finding out how LV interprets the Prophecy, and not specifically as a Death Eater or ally of Voldemort. I could be wrong, though; it's possible there's more to Snape's violent antipathy to Black than a personal agenda. He could be assuming that the spy/traitor must have been a Death Eater and he could believe the rumors that Black was LV's most important supporter, but I don't think he does. I think he simply sees him as what Hagrid calls "a murderin' traitor" and as a danger to the Prophecy Boy, Harry Potter. And for personal reasons, he wants to be the one to bring the "murderer" and his werewolf ally to justice. And if he can save Harry and friends in the process, so be it. Pippin: Wow, we really see this differently! The Death Eaters were openly taking credit for their kills in the latter years of VWI, setting Voldemort's mark in the air for all to see. IMO, it would be impossible for Snape to think that any member of the Order could knowingly help Voldemort and *not* think they were aiding the Death Eaters. I think one of the things that is making Snape crazy in the Shrieking Shack is that Harry accuses him of acting on a schoolboy grudge, when from Snape's PoV, Lupin and Sirius are taking advantage of Harry's schoolboy concepts of friendship and honor. IMO, Snape was working off the following information in the Shrieking Shack: 1. Someone close to the Potters had passed information about them to Voldemort (PoA ch 10) 2. The Death Eaters were picking off Order members one by one (OOP ch 9) 3. The spy had been acting for a year before the Potters were killed.(PoA ch 19) 4. Sirius Black was suspected of being a spy (PoA ch 10) 5. The Potters' Secret-Keeper betrayed them (PoA ch 10) 6. Sirius Black was 'tracked down by Pettigrew' and 'murdered thirteen people.' (PoA ch 10) It's inference that Snape knew some of this, but if he was part of Dumbledore's hunt for the spy, he surely would. Can you imagine Snape, who's always putting two and two together, *not* thinking it's all related and Sirius was the reason that Order members were getting picked off? Further, if Snape immediately assumed that Lupin would help Sirius in PoA, wouldn't he suppose Lupin had been helping Sirius all along? But I see your point. A spy with more devious and self-deluding ways than Sirius might persuade himself that the information he was passing couldn't possibly be reaching Voldemort. He was just helping out a friend. We know Lupin is capable of some rather astounding self- delusions, for example that Sirius's animagus abilities didn't have anything to do with his ability to enter the castle and grounds. However, it's simply impossible that Peter, who's *not* much of an actor AFAWK, could sit around the kitchen table for a year, gathering information he knew would be used to kill his friends, and not give himself away. Nor could he successfully pretend that they were still his friends if he'd turned against them. Any suspicions that Snape had about Sirius must have been based on false or misleading information, but it's not necessarily true that his suspicion of Lupin was only based on false or misleading information, especially since Sirius shared it. Maybe Lupin was spotted in Knockturn Alley, or someone overheard him quarreling with Dumbledore. Maybe it had to do with the Prank. *Something* must have made Sirius (and James) doubt their old friend. Something must have convinced Snape that Lupin would side with Sirius rather than with James's son. The Marauders and Snape had known Lupin for years, they wouldn't suspect him of turning DE any more than Ron would suspect Hagrid of joining the evil Giants-- unless there was a reason. Not just evidence, which might be forged by Voldemort, but something about Lupin's character and history. After all, I can't get most of you folks to believe that Lupin is ESE! no matter how plausible the arguments are, because in most of your minds, Lupin's character and history firmly establish him as a good guy. But Lupin's friends doubted him. Why, why, why??? Otherwise I can't imagine Sirius saying, "Well, I know it's not *me*, so Moony must be the spy" without James rejoining, "Well, *that* can't* right, you might as well suspect Lily. Or me." Carol: Nor do I think that Snape would assume that Lupin was a DE himself just because he aided his dear friend Sirius, again putting friendship above all else, even if that means becoming an accessory to Harry Potter's murder. Pippin: But Harry is the son of Lupin's dear friend James! What would make Snape suspect Lupin of wanting to help Sirius kill him? Carol: (Thanks for making me think about this, though; I'm beginning to understand Snape's vehement hatred of Lupin in PoA a bit better from the DDM!Snape standpoint, which you surely know I believe in.And I do wonder how Black got into Hogwarts since the Whomping Willow passage doesn't lead into the castle itself. Did he sneak into the sweet shop in dog form? How could he manage that, even with Crookshanks' help? *That* could be evidence for ESE!Lupin, possibly. Anybody have any ideas?) Pippin: Sirius could pass the dementors in dog form. That's how he got out of Azkaban. He must have slipped past them on Halloween, which was a Hogsmeade visit day, when the gates to the grounds were open. We know that Filch isn't always terribly careful about locking the front doors, even when the castle's on high alert. The night Sirius attacked Ron's bed curtains, the twins were in Hogsmeade raiding Honeydukes, so Sirius might have been able to follow them. Pippin: > There is canon that Snape believed that Harry specifically was in danger from Sirius, besides the "bended knee" passage which you quoted in your post which shows that he knew that Black had betrayed the Potters. Carol responds: Of course there is. I'm not arguing with this point. I completely agree that Snape thought Harry was in danger from Black, and with good reason, especially after the attack on the Fat Lady. But which "bended knee" passage? I checked upthread and I didn't quote any passage. Not that I'm arguing here. I'm just curious about the passage you're referring to. Pippin: PoA 19: Snape- I have just saved your neck; you should be thanking me on bended knee! You would have been well-served if he'd killed you! You'd have died like your father, too arrogant to believe you might be mistaken in Black" Somebody quoted that recently, I'm sorry if it wasn't you, Carol! Pippin From carodave92 at yahoo.com Sat Jan 14 22:11:42 2006 From: carodave92 at yahoo.com (carodave92) Date: Sat, 14 Jan 2006 22:11:42 -0000 Subject: Alarm clock In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146463 "Marg McKay-Lowndes" > wrote: > > > > > > I'm just browsing through my favourite parts of HBP and have > > noticed the alarm clock on p.46, (Bloomsbury) which is mentioned > > a few times. Harry repaired it a while back apparently. Does > > anyone see any significance in this? ... > > bboyminn: > > I think you may be looking to deeply for something that is not there. > First ask yourself where would Harry get an alarm clock at the > Dursleys. They seem to give him the absolute minimum 'stuff' they can > get away with. They are not likely to run out and buy Harry a clock, > and they are not likely nice enough to give him an old clock when they > replaced one. So, Harry found an old discarded clock and fixed it. Now Carodave: I believe that the clock was something Dudley discarded when he broke it (during a diet induced tantrum?) It was stored with a bunch of other broken items in Dudley's second room, which became Harry's room after he moved out of the cupboard under the stairs. Carodave From gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk Sat Jan 14 22:41:12 2006 From: gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk (Geoff Bannister) Date: Sat, 14 Jan 2006 22:41:12 -0000 Subject: Alarm clock In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146465 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "carodave92" wrote: Marg McKay-Lowndes; > > > > > I'm just browsing through my favourite parts of HBP and have > > > noticed the alarm clock on p.46, (Bloomsbury) which is mentioned > > > a few times. Harry repaired it a while back apparently. Does > > > anyone see any significance in this? ... Carodave: > > I believe that the clock was something Dudley discarded when he > broke it (during a diet induced tantrum?) It was stored with a bunch > of other broken items in Dudley's second room, which became Harry's > room after he moved out of the cupboard under the stairs. Geoff: This is quite intriguing. I have just browsed back through Philosopher's Stone and the earliest references I seem to be able to find which cover both Carodave's comment and Marge McKay-Lowndes' are: "It only took Harry one trip upstairs to move everything he owned from the cupboard to this room. He sat down on the bed and stared around him. Nearly everything in here was broken. The month-old cine- camera was lying on top of a small, working tank Dudley had once driven over next door's dog; in the corner was Dudley's first-ever television set, which he'd out his foot through when his favourite programme had been cancelled; there was a large bird-cage which had once held a parrot that Dudley had swapped at school for a real air- rifle, which was up on a shelf with the end all bent because Dudley had sat on it. Other shelves were full of books. They were the only things in the room that looked as if they'd never been touched." (PS "The Letters from No One" p.32 UK edition) "The repaired alarm clock rang at six o'clock the next morning." (ibid. p.33) No information about Harry repairing the clock so why comment that it is? He couldn't have done it then because the second quote from canon is the very next morning.... Odd. However, on more than one occasion in the past, we have been reminded of Sigmund Freud's remark "Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar". From belviso at attglobal.net Sat Jan 14 23:14:51 2006 From: belviso at attglobal.net (Magpie) Date: Sat, 14 Jan 2006 18:14:51 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Squibs have genes to do magic? References: <43C94E13.9040302@pacificpuma.com> Message-ID: <017b01c61960$53408550$8c92400c@Spot> No: HPFGUIDX 146466 Jazmun Concolor: > Squibs are not rare. Its noted (somewhere in the books) that more > squibs are born to purebred families. Though I bet the Malfoy's would > have killed off any born in their family. Even Ron mentions having a > relitive who is a Squib. One of the reasons the purebred families are > dying out, other then marrying non-purebreds is because they are having > squib children. Why do you think Neville's grandmother was so concerned > with knowing he was magical that they would drop him out a window? Magpie: Do you have canon for this? Because while it is a story I can imagine working, I don't think this is what the author is saying. (Fandom tends to argue both sides of this idea, sometimes saying purer blood is considered stronger by wizards.) I don't remember Ron saying that Squibs weren't rare, and while I remember his reference to an accountant cousin they didn't talk about, I actually thought his line about wizards dying out without Muggleborn/Muggle blood really was about numbers, not magic being diluted or killed off through too much purity. I definitely don't remember anything in the books suggesting Squibs are particularly associated with Pureblood families. JKR's words about magic being dominant and resiliant, imo, were speaking exactly against this idea and saying that no, there was no genetic weakening or strengthening of magic going on. Neville's family worrying about him was, imo, supposed to just be reflecting Neville's general problem with confidence and incompetence, not suggesting Pureblood lines are unstable. -m From raeangelavhs at msn.com Sun Jan 15 01:22:23 2006 From: raeangelavhs at msn.com (raeangelavhs) Date: Sun, 15 Jan 2006 01:22:23 -0000 Subject: HBP: Why I am 98.6% certain that... In-Reply-To: <13e.176af5b9.300e477e@aol.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146467 Juli wrote: > I think not. In fact--and hence the title of this post--I am 98.6% certain > that Snape is still on the side of the Order, and that every action he took in > HBP, up to and including killing DD with the Avada Kedavra curse, was done with > DD's knowledge and consent. > > Why am I 98.6% certain, you ask? The points: Raeangelavhs: My reply is short because a lot of points have all been mentioned and there is no reason to repeat them. I believe Snape is still good and I would like to add a piece of evidence not yet mentioned. In GoF p. 679 (US) when DD, McGon, and Snape burst into the room and stun Moody/Crouch Jr DD walks over to C's stunned body and "Snape followed him, looking into the Foe-Glass, where his own face was still visible, glaring into the room." Later on p. 683 DD is about to question Crouch Jr and in the Foe- Glass "...th reflections of Dumbledore, Snape, and McGonagall were still glaring down upon them all." While in the first excert Snape may not have known who this "Moody" actually was, DD had removed them from the scene of the maze because "'The moment he took you, I knew'". And by the second passage Crouch had been revealed (p. 682) so Snape knew that it was a Death Eater that the three of them had captured. The fact that Snape knew that before him was one of Voldemort's most faithful servants (the one who succeded in resurrecting him and Snape knew that in the past Crouch Jr had sought out LV and served a sentence for it) and yet in the Foe-Glass it is shown that he is still C's enemy, standing with DD and McGon. I'm pretty sure a Foe-Glass can't be fooled. It's a sure way to tell where Snape's loyalties lie. Raeangelavhs From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Sun Jan 15 03:44:27 2006 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Sun, 15 Jan 2006 03:44:27 -0000 Subject: Spies, Lies and Self fullfilling prophecies In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146468 Pippin wrote: > Wow, we really see this differently! The Death Eaters were openly taking credit for their kills in the latter years of VWI, setting Voldemort's mark in the air for all to see. IMO, it would be possible for Snape to think that any member of the Order could knowingly help Voldemort and *not* think they were aiding the Death Eaters. Carol responds: Okay, I see your point. I think that spy!Peter (or in Snape's view, spy!Sirius) was operating very much in the background, not as a DE himself and not known to the DEs because he was giving his information directly to Voldemort (who trusts no one and operates in secrecy). But that information would definitely have included names and perhaps addresses of Order members, whom the DEs were "picking off one by one." But since the DEs were essentially doing Voldie's dirty work, Snape would think of it as aiding Voldie, not aiding the Death Eaters. Or maybe I'm attributing my own interpretation to Snape. (There's no connection to Lupin here that I see, though. We only need one spy, and unless JKR is misleading us, which I don't put past her since she's almost certainly doing so with Snape in HBP, that spy is Peter.) > Pippin: > I think one of the things that is making Snape crazy in the Shrieking Shack is that Harry accuses him of acting on a schoolboy grudge, when from Snape's PoV, Lupin and Sirius are taking advantage of Harry's schoolboy concepts of friendship and honor. Carol: Interesting. Sort of like his reaction to being called a coward in HBP. Harry just doesn't "get it." But even if Lupin is operating on schoolboy principles of friendship and honor, isn't that pretty much what I said that you disagreed with, that Lupin puts his old friendship with Sirius above everything else, even (in Snape's view) danger to Harry? As I said, "Snape could be seeing Lupin's weakness, his desire to be liked and his willingness to overlook the misdeeds of his friends , and applying it to this specific instance, rather than seeing Lupin as "aiding the Death Eaters" in some more general sense. But I guess you're saying that Snape is concerned with something even beyond Black's apparent desire to murder Harry and is thinking in terms of Black murdering Harry to aid Vapormort and the disbanded DEs, who have no idea that Voldemort will be restored in the next book? I'm not arguing, just asking for clarification. > Pippin: > IMO, Snape was working off the following information in the Shrieking Shack: Carol: Yes, I agree with the numbered points that I snipped. Pippin: > Can you imagine Snape, who's always putting two and two together, *not* thinking it's all related and Sirius was the reason that Order members were getting picked off? Carol: I answered that question earlier. Yes, he thinks that Sirius was offering information that led to the Order members being picked off one by one (though he himself was not an Order member at the time, I think he and Dumbledore had some sort of understanding and Snape knew that the murders the DEs were committing were of people close to Dumbledore). But as I said, I think that Snape would see it as aiding Voldemort rather than aiding the Death Eaters, who were only (or primarily) Voldie's agents. (No doubt some of them had their own agendas and their own enemies as well, but I think they killed spedific people on Voldie's orders based on the spy's information rather than randomly killing people they thought might be members of the Order. I'm not even sure that the existence of the Order was known to the DEs in general. Do we have any evidence that it was?) Pippin: > Further, if Snape immediately assumed that Lupin would help Sirius in PoA, wouldn't he suppose Lupin had been helping Sirius all along? Carol responds: I think that Snape simply knows Lupin's weakness, his old trait of being unwilling to use his authority as Prefect to stop his friends from hexing people, and he thinks that weakness, that need for friendship and approval, will outweigh everything else in Lupin's mind, even though both he and Lupin "know" that Sirius is a spy, a traitor, and a murderer. After all, Lupin didn't stop liking James and Sirius after Sirius (and in Snape's view, James) tried to get Severus killed by werewolf!Lupin when they were all sixteen. So Snape thinks that Lupin will turn a blind eye to Sirius's murderous impulses, even to the extent of helping him into the castle to murder their old friend James's son. So Snape thinks very badly of Lupin, but I still don't see him connecting Lupin with Death Eaters other than Sisirus Black (whom Snape may think was only a spy, traitor, and murderer, unless he chooses to believe the hysteria promoted by the Daily Prophet). But still, Snape would not necessarily assume that Lupin was helping Sirius in the old days, too, or that he had any part in the events at Godric's Hollow or in the supposed murder of PP and the actual deaths of the twelve Muggles. Those events Snape would pin squarely on Sirius Black (with his rage against Black proportionately increased by the guilty knowledge that his own revelation of the Prophecy made Black's betrayal possible and that his remorse had been for nothing since the Potters were dead). *But* if Snape is wrong about Sirius Black being the murderer and betrayer of the Blacks, and wrong that Lupin has been helping him get into the school all along, he's wrong that Black was "helping Death Eaters" (or, in my view, aiding Voldemort) and that Lupin was helping him to do so. Absolutely, Snape attributes murderous intent to both Black and Lupin, or at least, thinks Lupin an accessory to attempted murder, but he's wrong, isn't he? Or do you think that Black wanted to murder Wormtail but Lupin wanted to murder Harry, so Snape is at least right about Lupin? Pippin:> > But I see your point. A spy with more devious and self-deluding ways than Sirius might persuade himself that the information he was passing couldn't possibly be reaching Voldemort. He was just helping out a > friend. Carol: Oh, dear. I don't understand this interpretation of my viewpoint at all. I think Snape knew that the spy was reporting directly to Voldemort, bypassing the DEs, who merely killed whomever Voldemort ordered them to kill. Snape was right in that but wrong in thinking, as DD did, that the spy was Black, not Pettigrew. (Lupin doesn't fit into this picture at all except that he, too, apparently suspected Black.) Pippin: We know Lupin is capable of some rather astounding self-delusions, for example that Sirius's animagus abilities didn't have anything to do with his ability to enter the castle and grounds. Carol: Yes, and in thinking that Black had picked up Dark Magic from his association with Voldemort. But as soon as he sees Pettigrew on the map, all his suspicions of Black fall away. (Not that he acted sensibly in rushing out without his potion, but that's not relevant here.) And Snape *knows* that Lupin is capable of self-delusion--so much so that he believes Lupin would be an accessory to murder for friendship's sake. And if Snape is DDM!, the last person he wants to see them murder is Harry Potter. Pippin: > However, it's simply impossible that Peter, who's *not* much of an actor AFAWK, could sit around the kitchen table for a year, gathering information he knew would be used to kill his friends, and not give himself away. Nor could he successfully pretend that they were still his friends if he'd turned against them. Carol: I'm not so sure. Peter shows himself capable of some pretty complicated potion making combined with spell-casting in GoF, not to mention capable of completing the potion after he's cut off his own hand. We see him capable of ruthlessness in his treatment of Harry and his murder of Cedric as well. And he found Voldemort and even kidnapped Bertha Jorkins. I think Peter is much more talented and resourceful than he wants people to think he is, including MPP and McGonagall when he was a boy. He's also profoundly lazy and self,centered, though, so his talents (including his ability to cast an AK) show themselves only when self-preservation triumphs over stasis (does that make sense? IOW, he acts only when he has to in order to save his own skin.) I doubt that anyone, Dumbledore (who doesn't spend much time with the Order, especially during the school year) or the Potters or Lupin or Black paid any attention to Pettigrew, who would simply be hanging around with them or fawning all over James, maybe occasionally expressing a whisper of doubt about one of his friends to another. I think he feigned friendship for a whole year without a qualm, all the while passing information on Order members (starting, maybe, with those he cared least about but working steadily toward the Potters. Maybe he thought that they'd be protected by Dumbledore and he wouldn't have to betray them, or maybe fear overcame his resolve. Not a very admirable person, our Peter. > Pippin: > Any suspicions that Snape had about Sirius must have been based on false or misleading information, but it's not necessarily true that his suspicion of Lupin was only based on false or misleading information, especially since Sirius shared it. Carol responds: But you're assuming that Snape's suspicions of Lupin relate to Godric's Hollow and the surrounding events. As far as I can see, his distrust of Lupin dates back to their school days (the ineffectual prefect mentioned above) and resurfaces when he suspects Lupin of helping Black into the school. I see no evidence of anything in between, any evidence that Snape thought Lupin was helping Black to spy or that Lupin was involved in the betrayal of the Potters. Now, since he thought that Lupin was helping Black into the school to kill Harry, he may have inferred that Lupin also had old connections with Voldemort, but those suspicions would have been based, IMO, on Lupin's being a werewolf ("How would I know how a werewolf's mind works?"), not on suspected DE connections. Pippin: > Maybe Lupin was spotted in Knockturn Alley, or someone overheard him quarreling with Dumbledore. Maybe it had to do with the Prank. *Something* must have made Sirius (and James) doubt their old friend. Something must have convinced Snape that Lupin would side with Sirius rather than with James's son. Carol: Yes, something convinced Black that Lupin was untrustworthy, and he in turn persuaded James and Lily to make Peter the Secret Keeper. I think that Lupin was either unemployed or drifting from job to job, increasingly poor, unhappy, and ill, without the night-time excursions of his school days and certainly without any wolfsbane potion. Quite possibly the difference in his circumstances and those of Black and the Potters caused them to drift apart. We do know that he wasn't present at Harry's baptism, so the mutual distrust could go back that far, possibly exacerbated by that event if Lupin felt excluded. Maybe Peter noticed the growing atmosphere of distrust and subtly played on it. We don't know. But Severus Snape was not around at that time, not a member of the Order. Black didn't know that he had become a Death Eater and *no one* knew that Snape was spying for Dumbledore until DD informed the Wizengamot. So Snape wouldn't have known about the cracks in the unity of MWPP. All he knew was that someone close to the Potters was a spy for Voldemort, and his money was on the supposedly murderous Sirius Black. > > > The Marauders and Snape had known Lupin for years, they wouldn't suspect him of turning DE any more than Ron would suspect Hagrid of joining the evil Giants--unless there was a reason. Not just evidence, which might be forged by Voldemort, but something about Lupin's character and history. After all, I can't get most of you folks to believe that Lupin is ESE! no matter how plausible the arguments are, because in most of your minds, Lupin's character and history firmly establish him as a good guy. But Lupin's friends doubted him. Why, why, why??? > Carol: Loneliness, self-distrust, a penchant for concealment, the suffering he had to endure each month that they could never fully understand? ("Furry little problem," as James dismissively called it)--quite possibly Lupin felt misunderstood and deserted and they interpreted his resentment or hurt feelings as enmity. Voldemort, after all, was sowing the seeds of distrust, and other werewolves were joining him. Why wouldn't they suspect Lupin, maybe even give in to anti-werewolf propaganda and think that DD had been mistaken about Lupin? Just because they distrusted him, for whatever reason, doesn't mean that the distrust was deserved. Absolutely, Lupin has his faults, but that doesn't make him ESE!. (It does make him a good candidate to suffer greatly from the DADA curse, though!) Pippin: > Otherwise I can't imagine Sirius saying, "Well, I know it's not *me*, so Moony must be the spy" without James rejoining, "Well, *that* can't* [be] right, you might as well suspect Lily. Or me." Carol: Except that the spy, by that time, was giving information specifically on the Potters--and they may have already known about the Prophecy as well--otherwise, why the private and hurried baptism of Harry and the need to assign him a guardian? Obviously the Potters weren't giving information on themselves and their child. It had to be someone close to them, and James trusted Sirius Black above all others. It "couldn't" be weak, helpless little Peter. It "had" to be Remus Lupin. Carol earlier: > Nor do I think that Snape would assume that Lupin was a DE himself just because he aided his dear friend Sirius, again putting friendship above all else, even if that means becoming an accessory to Harry Potter's murder. > > Pippin: > But Harry is the son of Lupin's dear friend James! What would make Snape suspect Lupin of wanting to help Sirius kill him? Carol: Sirius Black is, in Snape's view, already a murderer and has spent twelve years in Azkaban for betraying the Potters and killing Peter Pettigrew, so of course he'd have no qualms about killing James's son. And if Lupin values friendship above all else, he would join with Black in killing Harry, or at least act as his accomplice, rather than lose his friendship. After all, James is dead but Sirius is alive, and if friendship is all that matters, a living friend is much more valuable than a dead one. And, of course, being a werewolf, he's not to be trusted. Also, I don't think Snape thinks that either Black or Lupin is trying to find and resurrect Voldemort, but he knows Harry's importance, and he intends to protect the ungrateful little rule-breaker at all costs. If you're right that he suspects both Black and Lupin of being Voldie supporters, then Snape's fury in the Shrieking Shack and later when SB escapes the Dementors is understandable and even justified. But his suspicions of both men, not just Black, are apparently unfounded. > Carol earlier: > > ( And I do wonder how Black got into Hogwarts since the Whomping Willow passage doesn't lead into the castle itself. Did he sneak into the sweet shop in dog form? How could he manage that, even with Crookshanks' help? *That* could be evidence for ESE!Lupin, possibly. Anybody have any ideas?) > > > Pippin: > Sirius could pass the dementors in dog form. That's how he got out of Azkaban. He must have slipped past them on Halloween, which was a Hogsmeade visit day, when the gates to the grounds were open. We know that Filch isn't always terribly careful about locking the front doors, even when the castle's on high alert. Carol: Well, yes. That explains how he got onto the grounds. But you think he just walked into the castle after that? He'd have had to do it in human form since a dog or a cat can't open the door. I was thinking that he must have used on of the tunnels, probably the one from Honeydukes, but how he could sneak in there in dog form without being seen and shooed out is a mystery to me. > Carol: > The night Sirius attacked Ron's bed curtains, the twins were in Hogsmeade raiding Honeydukes, so Sirius might have been able to follow them. Carol: Again, he'd have had to enter the shop in dog form to get past the Dementors. I don't see how he could get away with that. > Carol earlier: Which "bended knee" passage? I checked upthread and I didn't quote any passage. Not that I'm arguing here. I'm just curious about the passage you're referring to. > > Pippin: > PoA 19: Snape- I have just saved your neck; you should be thanking me on bended knee! You would have been well-served if he'd killed you! You'd have died like your father, too arrogant to believe you might be mistaken in Black" Somebody quoted that recently, I'm sorry > if it wasn't you, Carol! Carol: Oh. I paraphrased the part about James Potter being too arrogant to believe Snape's warning about Black. But I knew I didn't have any full quotations in my post, and I'd forgotten the "bended knee" Part. Now if you'd said the passage on James's arrogance, I'd have known what your were referring to. Mea culpa! Carol, still not seeing how Snape's view of Lupin, however understandable, should persuade the rest of us that Lupin is ESE! From kchuplis at alltel.net Sun Jan 15 03:58:58 2006 From: kchuplis at alltel.net (Karen) Date: Sat, 14 Jan 2006 21:58:58 -0600 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Spies, Lies and Self fullfilling prophecies In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <41799876-857B-11DA-8C64-000393B04DDE@alltel.net> No: HPFGUIDX 146469 On Saturday, January 14, 2006, at 09:44 PM, justcarol67 wrote: > > Carol responds: > Harry just doesn't "get it." But even if Lupin is operating on > schoolboy principles of friendship and honor, isn't that pretty much > what I said that you disagreed with, that Lupin puts his old > friendship with Sirius above everything else, even (in Snape's view) > danger to Harry? OK, perhaps I am not remembering correctly, but it doesn't really matter what *Snape* believes in regard to Lupin being ESE or not. Lupin was not helping Black and we know he did not become friendly toward Black again, (that I recall, I'll pay more attention next time I read it) until he knew that Pettigrew was still alive, at which point I believe it became obvious (or at least to suspicion) to a maurader, at any rate, that it had to be Pettigrew that was the rotter. Otherwise, why would Pettigrew have hidden all this time. I don't believe it would have been too difficult for Lupin to put two and two together. As far as we know, Sirius might even have mentioned at some point to his inner circle "maybe I'm not the best choice for secret keeper since it's well known we are friends". No one knew that he HAD convinced them to use Pettigrew (which when you think about it, WHAT WERE JAMES AND LILY THINKING! it's not like the boy they knew had ever shown much backbone.) but it's possible that Sirius had voiced concerns. I guess my point is that it seems moot to me what Snape thought of Lupin. Like Harry, who just can't see past Snape's behaviour to him, I don't believe Snape would have been able to see past HIS boyhood school prejudices either. That particular point doesn't get you any nearer to ESE!Lupin. kchuplis From Lynx412 at AOL.com Sun Jan 15 04:13:54 2006 From: Lynx412 at AOL.com (Lynx412 at AOL.com) Date: Sat, 14 Jan 2006 23:13:54 EST Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: HBP: Why I am 98.6% certain that... Message-ID: <1b9.234a801d.30fb2602@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 146470 In a message dated 1/14/2006 8:42:10 PM Eastern Standard Time, raeangelavhs at msn.com writes: > > In GoF p. 679 (US) when DD, McGon, and Snape burst into the room and > stun Moody/Crouch Jr DD walks over to C's stunned body and "Snape > followed him, looking into the Foe-Glass, where his own face was > still visible, glaring into the room." I actually had a slightly different interpretation of that. I'd say it's obvious that Snape is his own worst enemy. The Other Cheryl [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From tonks_op at yahoo.com Sun Jan 15 04:51:20 2006 From: tonks_op at yahoo.com (Tonks) Date: Sun, 15 Jan 2006 04:51:20 -0000 Subject: Missing characters and Portrait!DD (was: Why I am 98.6% certain that...) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146471 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "justcarol67" wrote: > Harry will have to talk to the portrait to find it out. > (Unless the protrait tells McGonagall and she tells the other Order > members.) But I got the distinct impression that Harry (and Ron and > Hermione) won't be at Hogwarts in Book 7 even if it still exists. > They'll be out searching for Horcruxes. No quidditch, no prefect > duties, no Head Girl for Hermione (I never had any Head Boy hopes for Harry)--and very little contact with any Order members who are still teaching. (We may well see more of Lupin if Harry's *not* in school.) > > I really hope you're right, both for Snape's sake and for my opinion of JKR's sophistication as a writer, but Harry did say he won't be back and RH said they'd go with him. Tonks: Will the school even be open? With DD gone who is going to send their kids there? JKR said that what we saw in HBP was the last Quidditch match. I think that this implies that the school will be closed. If that is the case, how will DD's portrait talk to anyone? And if the school is closed, maybe Harry will have to go back there because one of the Horcruxes is there somewhere. Then he could have a chat with DD. Tonks_op From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Sun Jan 15 05:09:53 2006 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Sun, 15 Jan 2006 05:09:53 -0000 Subject: HBP: Why I am 98.6% certain that... In-Reply-To: <1b9.234a801d.30fb2602@aol.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146472 @m. wrote: > > In GoF p. 679 (US) when DD, McGon, and Snape burst into the room and stun Moody/Crouch Jr DD walks over to C's stunned body and "Snape followed him, looking into the Foe-Glass, where his own face was still visible, glaring into the room." [raeangelavhs interprets this quotation as evidence for DDM!Snape ] > The Other Cheryl responded: > I actually had a slightly different interpretation of that. I'd say it's obvious that Snape is his own worst enemy. Carol notes: If that's the case, wouldn't it mean that McGonagall and Dumbledore were their own worst enemies as well? The glass shows the three of them approaching Fake!Moody's office; he's the current owner of the Foe Glass, and he has stated earlier that it reveals his enemies. (He says he's not in danger till he sees the whites of their eyes.) I think that Snape's reflection in the Foe Glass, along with his actions against Fake!Moody, his courageously revealing his Dark Mark to Fudge, and his going off on an obviously perilous secret mission for Dumbledore, which they have clearly planned together ("If you are ready, if you are prepared") is some of our strongest canonical evidence for DDM!Snape. And we also see for the first time DD's real concern, even fondness, for Snape. After Snape leaves, it's several minutes before he can even speak. Clearly he fears for snape's safety and success. Maybe he knows, even then, that this is the beginning of the end for both of them. After GoF, and again after OoP, when Snape sends the Order after Harry, there was no doubt in my mind where Snape's loyalties lie. HBP, on the other hand, does make Snape appear to be his own worst enemy. But I don't think that's the meaning of the Foe Glass, and it helps to remember that earlier evidence as we read HBP. Or, at least, it does for me. Carol From becks3uk at yahoo.co.uk Sat Jan 14 12:07:53 2006 From: becks3uk at yahoo.co.uk (Rebecca Williams) Date: Sat, 14 Jan 2006 12:07:53 +0000 (GMT) Subject: Birthday Lists / Re: Who dies in 7? In-Reply-To: <29.191b42b.30f95df5@aol.com> Message-ID: <20060114120753.18176.qmail@web25302.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 146473 sunnylove0 at aol.com wrote: > Of course we do have the Birthday Theory, that all characters > who are wished a Happy Birthday in 2005/2006 are still alive > to celebrate. > > Both Albus Dumbledore and Sirius Black are left off the > birthday lists, and so are Tonks and Trelawney. Becky asks: This is interesting, I haven't heard of this before. Where are the birthday lists? I can't find them. From jajaredor at yahoo.com Sun Jan 15 04:07:59 2006 From: jajaredor at yahoo.com (jajaredor) Date: Sun, 15 Jan 2006 04:07:59 -0000 Subject: Ginny and how she changes In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146474 flyingmonkeypurple: > Third book: > She is not a big part. I see how she is closer with Hermione. > > Fourth book: > She has gotten closer with Hermione because she knows who she > is going to the ball with. She won't tell Ron or Harry who it > is. > > Fifth book: > Harry realizes that she is really smart and can play > Quidditch. > > As far as Ginny suddenly liking Quidditch why would Harry > notice that she likes Quidditch so much when she embarrasses > him so much? Hi... while I agree with you in some parts, that Ginny is closer with Hermione than with the other boys, I couldn't help but wonder if that is so, why Ginny bite back Hermione harshly when Harry used the sectumsempra? that he found in the book. She could've been a bit mild in telling her off but instead, she went off harshly. If Ginny is smart, she could've figured out that Hermione doesn't mean any harm at all. She was just worried like she's always been. Hermione was the one who helped her overcome her shyness when it comes to Harry and Ginny should've considered that... Mmm... my take on Ginny suddenly liking Quidditch was that because Harry was into it so much and she just wanted him to see that they have a common ground. Which leads me to thinking why she accused Hermione of not knowing anything about Quidditch.. or not really that sudden... could've been that Ginny has always played Quidditch but because Harry likes it so much, she wanted him to show that she could excel into it too that's why she puts an extra effort in learning and studying the craft. -- Jade From dunedaingirl3 at hotmail.com Sun Jan 15 05:12:30 2006 From: dunedaingirl3 at hotmail.com (Birgit) Date: Sun, 15 Jan 2006 05:12:30 -0000 Subject: Squibs have genes to do magic? In-Reply-To: <017b01c61960$53408550$8c92400c@Spot> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146475 > Jazmyn Concolor: > Squibs are not rare. It's noted (somewhere in the books) that > more squibs are born to purebred families. Quote from JK's website: "Squibs are rare; magic is a dominant and resilient gene." So, yes, Squibs ARE rare. It is not a common occurance. Of course, as has been pointed out, the gene thing does not hold water. Frankly, no gene theory holds water - if Magic were a dominant gene, we would see more Squibs (since there would be more heterozygotic gene sets, with a recessive 'no magic' gene.) But Squibs are rare. Also, there would be no Muggle born wizards - since all the parents would have to carry the recessive "no magic" gene, there is no chance of a child turning up magical. On the other hand, if the 'magic' gene were recessive, then wizard half-bloods should be exceedingly rare, since, if we take gene distribution for other 'special' recessive genes like albinism, for example, the trait should only be carried by a small percentage of the Muggle population. Instead, we see that children in a wizard/Muggle marriage tend to be magical (which would point to a dominant gene.) So either way, it doesn't work. Birgit (cecelle on fanfiction.net) From ctcasares at yahoo.com Sun Jan 15 06:23:34 2006 From: ctcasares at yahoo.com (tylerswaxlion) Date: Sun, 15 Jan 2006 06:23:34 -0000 Subject: Squibs have genes to do magic? In-Reply-To: <43C9647C.8090107@sprynet.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146476 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Bart Lidofsky wrote: Steve wrote: So, let's ask ourselves from a more practical stand point if it is possible for a genius or a retarded person to occur in a family of people with normal intelligence? It would seem that both these events do occur. Tyler: In the same family, even. Bart: (slightly paraphrased for length) Consider, one magic gene pair, [recessive]. We will call the magic version W for Wizard/witch, and the non-magic M for muggle. [snip] ALL wizards would be WW, but unless a wizard marries a WM muggle (WM's would not be magical), all the children would be squibs. On the other hand, if a WM muggle marries another WM muggle, one out of 4 children would be magical. Tyler: I don't think a single gene solves it. You need at least two. Magical ability seems to come in degrees, not simply a yes/no choice. It's not like gender--you're either a boy or a girl. You can get a Filch or a Dumbledore or a Fudge. Some of it is training, but not everyone can master the basic spells to qualify for the training. I think it's more likely that magical ability is related to multiple genes, probably on multiple chromosomes. Like some rare diseases-- it's not enough for each parent to have one recessive gene, but they each have to have multiple recessives. Wizarding families intermarrying would be a bit like blue-eyed people--everyone has the recessive magic gene, so everyone is predisposed toward a magical ability. But depending on whether or not the second gene is also present, let's call it a power gene, the strength of the magic is affected. You need a bigger grid for the W-wizard, M-muggle genes and the P- powerful, S-squib genes, so I'll just use subsets for simplicity. Suppose two wizards with double recessive wizarding genes marry, each having one dominant and one recessive power gene. you get Parents: WW/PS + WW/PS = WW/PP WW/PS WW/PS WW/SS Where one in four is an extremely powerful wizard, two are ordinary wizards and one is a Squib. Again, the odds are 1 in four will be a Squib, but those odds are for *each* child, so it's possible that no Squibs could be born or many could, depending on how many children this set of parents have. This could actually be the answer to what the real difference is between a Muggle and a Squib. In a Muggle, the power gene would be completely irrelevant--Muggles don't have the Wizarding gene that allows them to use magic at all. Squibs, on the other hand, would have the Wizarding Gene, but they don't have the Power gene, so they can't use their magical ability to any noticable degree. Squibs could still produce wizard offspring if they marry other wizards. Squib--WWSS Wizard--WWPS or Squib--WWSS + Wizard--WWPP WWSP WWSS WWSP WWSP WWSS WWSS WWSP WWSP where the first is a Squib with an ordinary powered wizard having a 1 in 4 chance of a wizard child and the second a Squib with a powerful wizard having all ordinary powered wizard children. Squibs marrying Squibs in this scenario would produce all Squibs. Who might then move into the Muggle community, perhaps marrying Muggles with the power gene. Eventually, their descendents might pop up as wizards. Additionally, statistics don't always "show" with small samples. I have brown eyes (dominant) and a recessive blue gene. My spouse has blue eyes. My kids had a 50/50 shot at my brown eyes, and "statistically" one of the two "should" have had brown eyes. However, they are both blue-eyed. If we had dozens and dozens of kids, the 50/50 statistic would appear, but 2 is too small of a sample. OK, with that I'll bring this long post to a close and go to bed. Hope it was clear. From mariabronte at yahoo.com Sun Jan 15 07:17:04 2006 From: mariabronte at yahoo.com (Mari) Date: Sun, 15 Jan 2006 07:17:04 -0000 Subject: July 31 2007 In-Reply-To: <007901c617fd$91cdb4a0$0400a8c0@pensive> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146477 Sherry: I'm actually thinking of getting to know someone from this list who lives in England or any other time zone that would get the book well in advance of me in the pacific time zone of the US. Mari now: Don't go for England, Australia is about 14 hours ahead of the U.S, England is only five or six :-) I live in Australia and if you really want, will let you know what you want to know once I have read the book...if you really want to know before reading. Cheers, Mari. From theadimail at yahoo.co.in Sun Jan 15 07:26:39 2006 From: theadimail at yahoo.co.in (theadimail) Date: Sun, 15 Jan 2006 07:26:39 -0000 Subject: The Last Horcrux Still Unmade Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146478 There are certain inconsistencies, it seems to me, in Dumbledore's theory about seven horcruxes. The greatest is his idea that Voldemort already has seven horcruxes. He may still be one horcrux short and still be looking for the Gryffindor object to turn it into a horcrux. There is no evidence that he has turned Nagini into a horcrux and that too, after the murder of a foul muggle, if the whole theory of making horcruxes is to make them after a particularly important murder. Further, if Voldemort's quest for seven-part soul and seven horcruxes is anyway significant, then there seems to be no grand effect of making seven horcruxes. If Voldemorte had turned Nagingi into a horcrux after Frank's murder, there should have been some signifact fallout to his state. But there is none. He is still in that child- like state till Harry is kidnapped later in the novel. So what gives? The reasons adduced by Dumbledore on why he thinks Nagini is a horcrux are no reasona at all because Nagini is devoted and faithful and seems to share an unusual relationship with him even before the Frank Bryce murder. ANd in Gobelt of Fire we see that Voldemort does not want to settle down for a cheap alternative and prefers to wait for harry's blood eventhough it is hard to get. So why would he settle down for Nagini when his original quest is to get the objects of the four original founders. This leads to another aspect of Half-Blodd Prince that I was intrigued about. The author said that she was chipping in large clues in the book on which the next book can be constructed; is Dumbledore's theory supposed to be one of those clues? Is the intellectual map for Harry all set out and all he has to do is find out the remaining horcruxes or is there going to be some bafflement for Harry and ourselves along the way? Regards, Adi From maria8162001 at yahoo.com Sat Jan 14 14:02:57 2006 From: maria8162001 at yahoo.com (Maria Vaerewijck) Date: Sat, 14 Jan 2006 06:02:57 -0800 (PST) Subject: Cheating In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20060114140257.21338.qmail@web53202.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 146479 Jen: > Voldemort knows Dumbledore will act as 'fools who love act.' > He wouldn't ever harm Draco, and more than that, he wants > Draco to make the right choice. Ceridwen: > A case of Voldemort knowing his enemy. Dumbledore's weakness > is also his strength, his ability to act as 'fools who love > act'. Dumbledore trusts the good side of people and the > higher human nature. > maria8162001: > > If Draco fails, LV would have the reason to kill both Draco > > and Narcissa. But LV didn't count on Narcissa asking Snape's > > help. > > Jen: You don't think? I thought that visual of the flames > wrapping around Snape's wrists was pretty much vintage > Voldemort. I think Voldemort was well aware of what Narcissa > was up to and figured he would kill two birds with one stone-- > Dumbledore, and Snape's humanity, which he regained through > Dumbledore's trust. "The Dark Lord always knows!" said Bella > in OOTP. I don't think Snape's superb Occlumency was enough to > completely fool the greatest Legilimens and dark wizard of the > century, even if LV didn't get the entire picture. But Snape > was useful to him, placed at Hogwarts, and he used him for his > own ends. Ceridwen: > And now, neither Snape nor Draco are useful. LV might > keep them around for window dressing, but they lost their > usefulness the minute they had to leave Hogwarts. IMO, if > they go back to LV, they're treading on thin ice. maria8162001: Thanks for making it clear Jen. I actually didn't think about what Bella said that "the Dark Lord always knows." I only assumed that LV didn't count on Narcissa asking Snape's help is because, (again I am assuming), LV expect his followers to do/act like him, never care for anybody except their own selves, not as 'fools who love act.' Again (this one is just my assumption), I don't think when Snape and Draco fled Hogwarts, that they went back to LV, I guess more that they are in hiding now together with Draco's mother. As Ceridwen put it so clearly that "they lost their usefulness the minute they leave Hogwarts." No matter how I dislike Snape in all the books, I, like Dumbledore, always believe on the good side of everyone even when sometimes it comes out as stupid. I think when Snape killed Dumbledore (which I think was SS and DD's plan all along), Snape & Draco have to proceed to hiding place only DD and Snape knows. What do you think of this? I have this assumption base on the things that happen in the funeral of DD, "White smoke spiralled into the air and made strange shapes: Harry thought, for one heart stopping moment, that he saw a phoenix fly joyfully into the blue, but next second the fire had vanished." I think that if that phoenix, Harry thought he saw isn't Dumbledore, then that is Dumbledore's patronus. And who could he be sending his patronus, except for Snape, that all is well and must proceed according to their plan. Just a thought. What do you think? maria8162001 From h2so3f at yahoo.com Sun Jan 15 10:48:51 2006 From: h2so3f at yahoo.com (h2so3f) Date: Sun, 15 Jan 2006 10:48:51 -0000 Subject: The Last Horcrux Still Unmade In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146480 Adi wrote: "There is no evidence that Voldemort has turned Nagini into a horcrux and that too, after the murder of a foul muggle, if the whole theory of making horcruxes is to make them after a particularly important murder." CH3ed: No evidence except for DD's shrewed guess, and DD's shrewed guesses have a way of turning out to be right. ;O) Despite the facade of supreme self-confidence, Voldy has doubts and fears about Harry. He must. Voldy, the self-proclaimed greatest wizard who ever lived (ever since he was 16), has failed to kill Harry the underage half-blooded wizard 4 times now. And one of those time he came out worse in a head to head duel (Harry forced Voldy's wand to regurgitate spells, not the other way around). I think the part of the prophecy Voldy knows of haunts him (Harry has the power to vanquish Voldy), and I think that if Voldy hadn't made the 6th and final horcrux by the beginning of GoF, he would have done so by the end of that book... after the graveyard scene. Adi wrote: "Further, if Voldemort's quest for seven-part soul and seven horcruxes is anyway significant, then there seems to be no grand effect of making seven horcruxes. If Voldemort had turned Nagingi into a horcrux after Frank's murder, there should have been some significant fallout to his state. But there is none. He is still in that child-like state till Harry is kidnapped later in the novel. So what gives?" CH3ed: Seven soul pieces but 6 horcruxes, I believe, the home soul piece lives in his body. I don't think we were given enough information to be able to tell if there has been any change in snake-baby!Voldy's appearance from the beginning of GoF to the Graveyard Scene. If Harry noticed any differences, the narrative doesn't tell us. So that is inconclusive either way. The changes that comes after making 1 horcrux isn't necessarily drastic. The Tom Riddle that went to see Hepzibah Smith and her relics in HBP memories probably had made a horcrux already, and Harry only noticed minor changes like reddish eyes. Not enough to alarm Mrs. Smith (she just thought he worked too much). Adi wrote: "The reasons adduced by Dumbledore on why he thinks Nagini is a horcrux are no reason at all because Nagini is devoted and faithful and seems to share an unusual relationship with him even before the Frank Bryce murder. And in Goblet of Fire we see that Voldemort does not want to settle down for a cheap alternative and prefers to wait for harry's blood eventhough it is hard to get. So why would he settle down for Nagini when his original quest is to get the objects of the four original founders." CH3ed: It does seem that Voldy shares an unusual relationship with Nagini. I don't think we have seen enough of them together before Frank snuffed it to be able to say that Nagini was devoted and faithful. Snakes aren't known for those traits. I suspect Nagini might turn on Voldy before it is all over. Either her or some of the 'devoted' DEs or both. I don't have evidence for it...just my suspicion. People who rule by fear usually don't inspire true loyalty. And the fanatics like Bella might just snap back at Voldy if she feels betrayed by him in the end. As to why would Voldy go ahead and make Nagini a horcrux, I'd think that if not before, then what happened in the GoF graveyard scene should have convinced him he had better get the full protection ASAP rather than waiting around. Harry was only 14 then when he out dueled Voldy, and Harry is only getting stronger with age. Adi wrote: "Is Dumbledore's theory supposed to be one of those clues? Is the intellectual map for Harry all set out and all he has to do is find out the remaining horcruxes or is there going to be some bafflement for Harry and ourselves along the way?" CH3ed: I think the ground work is set out by DD, yep. There are 4 more horcruxes for Harry to search and destroy before he go after Voldy. But I think we can trust Jo to throw us something off-guard along the way. She is the master at that. Tho the general layout for Book 7 is pretty much clear, I expect it to be an exciting read, nonetheless. CH3ed :O) From vuurdame at xs4all.nl Sun Jan 15 12:15:36 2006 From: vuurdame at xs4all.nl (festuco) Date: Sun, 15 Jan 2006 12:15:36 -0000 Subject: Squibs have genes to do magic? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146481 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "staceyv2220" wrote: > And Mrs. Figg's house smells like cabbage, the same smell > Harry notices at the potion shop in Diagon Alley. They cannot do big > magic. Mrs. Figg states that she cannot "so much as transfigure a > tea bag," but she is certainly trying her hand at potion making. > > SV > Or maybe she likes to cook cabbage. Gerry From vuurdame at xs4all.nl Sun Jan 15 12:30:16 2006 From: vuurdame at xs4all.nl (festuco) Date: Sun, 15 Jan 2006 12:30:16 -0000 Subject: Squibs have genes to do magic? In-Reply-To: <43C94E13.9040302@pacificpuma.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146482 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Jazmyn Concolor wrote: > Squibs are not rare. Its noted (somewhere in the books) that more > squibs are born to purebred families. Though I bet the Malfoy's would > have killed off any born in their family. Even Ron mentions having a > relitive who is a Squib. One of the reasons the purebred families are > dying out, other then marrying non-purebreds is because they are having > squib children. Why do you think Neville's grandmother was so concerned > with knowing he was magical that they would drop him out a window? According to JKR squibs are rare: "I have been asked all sorts of questions about Squibs since I first introduced the concept in `Chamber of Secrets'. A Squib is almost the opposite of a Muggle-born wizard: he or she is a non-magical person born to at least one magical parent. Squibs are rare; magic is a dominant and resilient gene. " http://www.jkrowling.com/textonly/en/extrastuff_view.cfm?id=19 I think you have read to much fanfiction, and your remark of more squibs being born from pureblood families and them dying out is nowhere in the books, but it is the idea of the very popular Marriage Law Challenge. Gerry From ceridwennight at hotmail.com Sun Jan 15 12:46:25 2006 From: ceridwennight at hotmail.com (Ceridwen) Date: Sun, 15 Jan 2006 12:46:25 -0000 Subject: Cheating In-Reply-To: <20060114140257.21338.qmail@web53202.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146483 maria: > I have this assumption base on the things that happen in the > funeral of DD, "White smoke spiralled into the air and made > strange shapes: Harry thought, for one heart stopping moment, > that he saw a phoenix fly joyfully into the blue, but next > second the fire had vanished." I think that if that phoenix, > Harry thought he saw isn't Dumbledore, then that is Dumbledore's > patronus. And who could he be sending his patronus, except for > Snape, that all is well and must proceed according to their plan. > Just a thought. What do you think? Ceridwen: There is some reason JKR put that part in the book. Yes, it could be DD's Patronus being fired off, or it could be his soul being released. I once attended a Native American funeral, with the traditional drumming, and the songs that were sung gave the definite impression of releasing the soul. So that's what I brought to the scene when I read it. The nagging problem for me in a Patronus being sent is, Dumbledore is shut up in a tomb. If he's sending a Patronus, and he's alive in there, it stirs all the ancient fears of being buried alive. Of course, with Dumbledore, there will always be some out, some secret passage or some way for him to not be stuck in there with life draining away (can one Apparate from inside a sealed tomb?). It is a curious thing, and it was mentioned for a reason, either to give a more mystical send-off for DD, or to set something up for book 7. I don't think this has been discussed very much. At least I haven't seen much mention. Ceridwen. From mgrantwich at yahoo.com Sun Jan 15 13:19:36 2006 From: mgrantwich at yahoo.com (Magda Grantwich) Date: Sun, 15 Jan 2006 05:19:36 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Spies, Lies and Self fullfilling prophecies In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20060115131936.44188.qmail@web53111.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 146484 --- pippin_999 wrote: > Maybe Lupin was spotted in Knockturn Alley, or someone > overheard him quarreling with Dumbledore. Maybe it > had to do with the Prank. *Something* must have made > Sirius (and James) doubt their old friend. Something must > have convinced Snape that Lupin would side with Sirius > rather than with James's son. > > > The Marauders and Snape had known Lupin for years, they > wouldn't suspect him of turning DE any more than Ron > would suspect Hagrid of joining the evil Giants-- > unless there was a reason. Not just evidence, which > might be forged by Voldemort, but something about Lupin's > character and history. After all, I can't get most > of you folks to believe that Lupin is ESE! no matter > how plausible the arguments are, because in most of > your minds, Lupin's character and history firmly > establish him as a good guy. But Lupin's friends > doubted him. Why, why, why??? Perhaps because there was a bit of an estrangement after the let's-scare-Snape-with-a-werewolf prank between Sirius and Remus. Perhaps Remus found himself more hurt than the others realized at being used as a monster to frighten someone else - someone who now knew his about his "furry little problem" and who didn't like them. Maybe he felt that Sirius' apology (and you can bet that James would have forced Sirius to apologize, even if Sirius didn't do it automatically) wasn't enough, that the other two were putting it all behind them a bit too readily. And if James was rewarded with Head Boy status as a result, then Lupin might wonder if James was really sorry about the whole thing. Being hurt can lead people to become more standoffish, more distant than before. James and Sirius might have understood at first, saying "he needs more time, he'll get over it". But if it led to a growing distance, after a few years they might conceivably wonder if they really knew Remus anymore and the reality of someone close to them being a spy might be enough to tip the scales against Remus. I think the Marauders pretty much broke up after the Prank. James took up with Lily soon after, they were getting older and looking at graduating and what to do with their lives, and the bonds were loosening. And if Remus - who didn't come from a moneyed background - knew that with his condition he'd never find consistent work, he might feel a bit resentful of Sirius and James who were whole and hearty and had enough resources so they didn't have to work. And Remus would be too proud to accept their help - which he might have been afraid they'd offer him out of charitable feeling. So yes, I think there was enough distance for some suspicion and distrust to grow. And of course we don't know how much Pettigrew was behind a lot of anti-Remus feeling, making innocuous comments that gave the wrong impressions, etc. etc. Magda __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com From willsonkmom at msn.com Sun Jan 15 13:30:51 2006 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Sun, 15 Jan 2006 13:30:51 -0000 Subject: Merlin-DD (wasRe: Cheating In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146485 > > Ceridwen: > The nagging problem for me in a Patronus being sent is, Dumbledore is > shut up in a tomb. If he's sending a Patronus, and he's alive in > there, it stirs all the ancient fears of being buried alive. Of > course, with Dumbledore, there will always be some out, some secret > passage or some way for him to not be stuck in there with life > draining away (can one Apparate from inside a sealed tomb?). > Potioncat: The main reason I think DD is dead, dead as we know it, is that I don't think JKR would kill someone in one book and have all the kiddies and adults wait years before finding out he's alive. If she was going to do that, I think she would have completed it in one book. Of course, Black didn't think DD would hire anyone who had ever worked for LV. So, who knows. I read the chapter titles before starting the book. Boy, was that misleading! As soon as I saw a chapter about a cave, I knew DD was going just like Merlin...only the cave didn't exactly work out that way. The most recent Merlin story I've read was by Mary Stewart. In her version Merlin is put in the cave, but is not really dead. He does come back to advise Arthur, but keeps an otherwise low profile. I haven't had the time to see if the older versions include Merlin's return or not. All the strange things around the funeral seem to point that way. But I wouldn't hold my breath. From lolita_ns at yahoo.com Sun Jan 15 13:44:05 2006 From: lolita_ns at yahoo.com (lolita_ns) Date: Sun, 15 Jan 2006 13:44:05 -0000 Subject: Birthday Lists / Re: Who dies in 7? In-Reply-To: <20060114120753.18176.qmail@web25302.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146486 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Rebecca Williams wrote: > > > sunnylove0 at a... wrote: > > Of course we do have the Birthday Theory, that all characters > > who are wished a Happy Birthday in 2005/2006 are still alive > > to celebrate. > > > > Both Albus Dumbledore and Sirius Black are left off the > > birthday lists, and so are Tonks and Trelawney. > > > Becky asks: > > This is interesting, I haven't heard of this before. Where are > the birthday lists? I can't find them. Lolita: As far as I know, there are no *lists*, but only regular *happy birthdays* on JKR's site. The happy birthday notices are only there for the duration of the day which is a character's birthday. E.g. On July 31st there was a notice 'Happy birthday Harry Potter', and the most recent one (as far as I know) was on January 9th for Snape. While I do agree that there is a possibility that the ones who were wished a happy birthday are the survivers, I think that we can also allow for the possibility that some people are not on the list because they are either not important enough, or else favourite enough. Which would explain the absence of e.g. Trelawney. With Dumbledore, otoh, I think that the birthday list theory sounds rather plausible. Also, Voldemort's absence combined with Harry's presence is a nice thought. Cheers, Lolita. From willsonkmom at msn.com Sun Jan 15 14:00:02 2006 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Sun, 15 Jan 2006 14:00:02 -0000 Subject: Birthday Lists / Re: Who dies in 7? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146487 > Lolita: > > As far as I know, there are no *lists*, but only regular *happy > birthdays* on JKR's site. The happy birthday notices are only there > for the duration of the day which is a character's birthday. E.g. On > July 31st there was a notice 'Happy birthday Harry Potter', and the > most recent one (as far as I know) was on January 9th for Snape. Potioncat: If you go to one of the timelines at the Lexicon you can find birthdays. I'm not sure if it will tell you if the information came from JKR's calendar or not. It might be an interesting idea to see who isn't there. I've always been more concerned with who was there. I was very surprised that she wished Draco a happy birthday...although it makes more sense after the HBP. From vuurdame at xs4all.nl Sun Jan 15 14:36:38 2006 From: vuurdame at xs4all.nl (festuco) Date: Sun, 15 Jan 2006 14:36:38 -0000 Subject: July 31 2007 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146488 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "antoshachekhonte" wrote: > Antosha: > Not to get all pragmatic or anything, but I promise you, the book will > either come out around US Memorial Day or US Labor Day, since those > are the kick-offs for the two largest book-buying seasons, not just in > the US, but in the UK and most of the rest of the northern hemisphere. And when would those dates be? > Publishers don't tend to launch books mid-summer, because people will > already have done their summer-reading purchasing, and aren't yet > buying for school and the holidays. HBP was an unusually LATE launch. And illustrates that JKR does not have to worry about petty things like people already having purchased ther summer reading. Do you honestly think anybody will keep from buying the last book because they already have bought a few books? Gerry From MadameSSnape at aol.com Sun Jan 15 14:56:11 2006 From: MadameSSnape at aol.com (MadameSSnape at aol.com) Date: Sun, 15 Jan 2006 09:56:11 EST Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: July 31 2007 Message-ID: <67.53c4f9c4.30fbbc8b@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 146489 In a message dated 1/15/2006 9:39:26 AM Eastern Standard Time, vuurdame at xs4all.nl writes: > Antosha: > Not to get all pragmatic or anything, but I promise you, the book will > either come out around US Memorial Day or US Labor Day, since those > are the kick-offs for the two largest book-buying seasons, not just in > the US, but in the UK and most of the rest of the northern hemisphere. And when would those dates be? ------------------------------ Sherrie here: Memorial Day is the last Monday in May; Labor Day is the first Monday in September. While I'd LOVE for it to be the former (hey, even a couple of months earlier is great!), I agree that this has never been a consideration for Rowling's publishers. Personally, I lean toward the 7 July 07 date - with her comments on the magical nature of 7 (7 is the number of the Mystic, in numerology), to have the 7th book published on 7-7-07 would just fit. Sherrie "Some kid a hundred years from now is going to get interested in the Civil War and want to see these places. He's going to go down there and be standing in a parking lot. I'm fighting for that kid." - Brian Pohanka, 1990 [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From vuurdame at xs4all.nl Sun Jan 15 15:32:51 2006 From: vuurdame at xs4all.nl (festuco) Date: Sun, 15 Jan 2006 15:32:51 -0000 Subject: Squibs have genes to do magic? In-Reply-To: <43C9647C.8090107@sprynet.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146490 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Bart Lidofsky wrote: > Unfortunately, the most likely theory is that JKR never really thought > it through. I agree with you, but true fanaticism makes everyting possible: http://www.sugarquill.net/index.php?action=gringotts&st=genetics Gerry From vuurdame at xs4all.nl Sun Jan 15 15:52:26 2006 From: vuurdame at xs4all.nl (festuco) Date: Sun, 15 Jan 2006 15:52:26 -0000 Subject: HBP: Why I am 98.6% certain that... In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146491 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "justcarol67" wrote: > HBP, on the other hand, does make Snape appear to be his own worst > enemy. But I don't think that's the meaning of the Foe Glass, and it > helps to remember that earlier evidence as we read HBP. Or, at least, > it does for me. When in doubt, look up something to give you faith :). It works the same way for me, but I cannot stop that nagging voice that says that whatever he was then, does not mean he is still so now. Gerry From cltravis at students.davenport.edu Sun Jan 15 15:39:50 2006 From: cltravis at students.davenport.edu (C) Date: Sun, 15 Jan 2006 15:39:50 -0000 Subject: Dumbledor Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146492 Okay I'm probably gonna stir something up with this, but this is a theory of mine and my husband... We dont think Dumbledore is dead and gone... Yes Snape killed him, but we think there is some kind of connection to the Phoenix. Like maybe, he was a Phoenix himself or something along those lines...he won't return as himself but most likely in Phoenix form to aid Harry in his journey... Does that sound totally ridiculous? Cltravis From foxmoth at qnet.com Sun Jan 15 16:31:45 2006 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Sun, 15 Jan 2006 16:31:45 -0000 Subject: Spies, Lies and Self fullfilling prophecies In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146493 > Pippin: > > Can you imagine Snape, who's always putting two and two together, > *not* thinking it's all related and Sirius was the reason that Order > members were getting picked off? > > Carol: > I answered that question earlier. Yes, he thinks that Sirius was > offering information that led to the Order members being picked off > one by one (though he himself was not an Order member at the time, I > think he and Dumbledore had some sort of understanding and Snape knew > that the murders the DEs were committing were of people close to > Dumbledore). But as I said, I think that Snape would see it as aiding > Voldemort rather than aiding the Death Eaters, who were only (or > primarily) Voldie's agents. Pippin: I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree on that. The point I was trying to make by saying "Death Eaters" instead of "Voldemort" is that by the time of James and Lily's deaths everyone in the Order knew that Voldemort was a killer and head of a terrorist gang. But not even Order members could tell who was a Death Eater and who wasn't. While it's inconceivable to me that an Order member could be as naive about Voldemort as Regulus was, it's not inconceivable that an Order member could mistakenly put their trust in a Death Eater. I also tried to show was that it's canon that Snape and Sirius both thought that Lupin was capable of cooperating with a murderer, and however they came to that conclusion *they're not wrong*. We saw Lupin about to help Sirius murder Pettigrew. When the time comes and ESE!Lupin confesses (if it ever does) that will be a clue. Like Draco telling Harry that he'd got himself a girlfriend in CoS, it wasn't exactly true at the time, but it was an anvil-sized hint of what was coming. You seem to agree with me that Lupin must have become estranged from his old friends. But what would he do then, this man who wants so much for people to like him? Where else would he turn? He wasn't naive about Voldemort. But he was, he admits, naive about other werewolves. It was a dangerous time to go looking for new friends, or so Hagrid told us in PS/SS. > Carol: > I'm not so sure. Peter shows himself capable of some pretty > complicated potion making combined with spell-casting in GoF, not to > mention capable of completing the potion after he's cut off his own > hand. We see him capable of ruthlessness in his treatment of Harry and > his murder of Cedric as well. And he found Voldemort and even > kidnapped Bertha Jorkins. Pippin: When dealing with a magician like JKR, you have to be suspicious of anything Harry deduces or Voldemort reports. We know that Harry jumps to conclusions, and Voldemort lies even in his villain tells all speeches. Peter "does" all of this offstage, except for dropping the last three ingredients and Voldemort's body into the brew. Even Neville could do that much. We've seen that potion-making can be done by inexpert wizards *if* there's someone else around to make sure they follow instructions exactly. The murder of Cedric is ambiguous. Harry thinks Voldemort did it. JKR said that "Wormtail" killed Cedric. But Wormtail is an *alias*. Like Discworld's Commander Vimes, I want to throw my hands in the air at this point, and shout, "You recognized him by his MASK?" The whole point of a mask is that *anyone* can hide behind it. The whole point of an *alias* is that you don't know who it is. I don't think we can be too sure she meant Peter. Especially since, as loyal DDM!Snape supporters, we must believe that JKR is highly, er, selective, about what she tells us. Carol: I think he feigned friendship for a whole year without a qualm, all the while passing information on Order members (starting, maybe, with those he cared least about but working steadily toward the Potters. Pippin: This is a very different Peter, then, from the one we see in the graveyard, who can't look Harry in the eye, or the one in the Shrieking Shack whose stammering and haunted looks betray him long before his confession does. If Peter had been able to look Harry in the eye and answer Sirius's accusations in complete sentences, his story would have held up. "Everyone knows Sirius was the secret-keeper. It's absurd to think that I was the spy. I adored James, I never would have betrayed him. I went into hiding because I was afraid that the Death Eaters would want revenge -- because I'd put the *real* spy in Azkaban!" Peter's clever enough to think of it, but he can't bring it off, because unlike whoever the spy really is, he's a lousy liar and obviously not an occlumens. When have we actually *seen* him lie successfully? He didn't even do a very good job of pretending to be a an ordinary rat...biting Goyle and then falling asleep again? Didn't you think that was rather odd? Hanging around with the Weasleys for far longer than an ordinary rat's life span? Wouldn't he have been wiser to find another wizarding family every few years? He *was* the secret keeper and he was forced to betray the Potters. He's too racked with guilt to successfully pretend that he didn't. But how could he be the spy? Good Heavens, he can't manage to spy on Snape and co for five minutes, he can't be questioned without breaking into a sweat, and you think he was spying on the Order of the Phoenix for a year while everyone around him was hunting for the spy? "Peter, you haven't seen anything suspicious, have you? "And Peter answers,"Well, I saw Sirius listening at a keyhole the other day" and neither Lupin, who seems to be a legilimens, nor Albus Dumbledore, who definitely is one, notices anything wrong? Good Grief! Pippin From ceridwennight at hotmail.com Sun Jan 15 16:51:11 2006 From: ceridwennight at hotmail.com (Ceridwen) Date: Sun, 15 Jan 2006 16:51:11 -0000 Subject: Merlin-DD (wasRe: Cheating In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146494 Potioncat: > The main reason I think DD is dead, dead as we know it, is that I don't > think JKR would kill someone in one book and have all the kiddies and > adults wait years before finding out he's alive. If she was going to do > that, I think she would have completed it in one book. Of course, Black > didn't think DD would hire anyone who had ever worked for LV. So, who > knows. Ceridwen: I sure don't! I do like to look at various possibilities, though. I come down on the unimaginative yet serviceable viewpoint that Dumbledore is dead. At least, that's how I see it right now. However, that phoenix rising was put there for a reason. It could be for three in-story reasons as I see it: Dumbledore is alive and sending a Patronus; Dumbledore is dead and this is his spirit being released; Dumbledore is alive and this was him in his Animagus form escaping. The fourth would be the author's reason of leaving things ambiguous. I might change my mind (on this and a lot of other things) before book 7 comes out. One byproduct of playing around with possibilities! Potioncat: > I read the chapter titles before starting the book. Boy, was that > misleading! As soon as I saw a chapter about a cave, I knew DD was > going just like Merlin...only the cave didn't exactly work out that way. Ceridwen: The chapter titles fit, but you get it only after you've read the chapters in most cases. 'Spinner's End' was one where you saw evidence throughout the chapter, but most aren't like that. And they can certainly convey a very different idea before reading as opposed to after! Potioncat: > The most recent Merlin story I've read was by Mary Stewart. In her > version Merlin is put in the cave, but is not really dead. He does come > back to advise Arthur, but keeps an otherwise low profile. I haven't > had the time to see if the older versions include Merlin's return or > not. All the strange things around the funeral seem to point that way. > > But I wouldn't hold my breath. Ceridwen: I'm not too familiar with the various Arthurian varieties. The one I'm most familiar with is that Merlin is resting in a crystal cave, ready to come to Arthur's aid if he needs him. And Arthur is either in a burial mound with his knights, or on the isle of Avalon, waiting for Britain to need him again. I do think JKR is playing off the legends, though I don't know which version, in Dumbledore's story. I do think he's Merlin, the wise and powerful wizard who advises the hero. I'll be interested in what Arthurians have to say on this topic. Ceridwen. From ltrain138 at yahoo.com Sun Jan 15 13:01:55 2006 From: ltrain138 at yahoo.com (LTrain138) Date: Sun, 15 Jan 2006 13:01:55 -0000 Subject: Snape's loyalties WAS: Re: HBP: Why I am 98.6% certain that... In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146495 > Raeangelavhs: > My reply is short because a lot of points have all been mentioned > and there is no reason to repeat them. > > I believe Snape is still good and I would like to add a piece of > evidence not yet mentioned. Ltrain138: Something to consider: IF Snape is really good than he has managed to hoodwink the most powerful Occlumens in the world (Voldemort). If he has achieved that, his power is far greater than I could have imagined. Ltrain138. From kelleyaynn at yahoo.com Sun Jan 15 17:01:28 2006 From: kelleyaynn at yahoo.com (kelleyaynn) Date: Sun, 15 Jan 2006 17:01:28 -0000 Subject: Magic genetics Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146496 Kelleyaynn: As several people have pointed out, Mendelian genetics isn't necessarily sufficient to explain how magic comes about. However, that doesn't mean that there is no Mendelian component to magic. Given that Muggle parents can have magic children, magic has to be recessive. That also explains why nearly all magical parents have magical children. Squibs, however present us with a quandry. Genetics is actually very complicated. There are relatively few traits that exhibit strict Mendelian inheritance. That isn't because they are "rogue", or don't follow the laws of inheritance, it's because at the molecular level genetics is much more complicated. Genes have promoter and regulation sequences in the DNA that can impact whether a gene gets expressed and how strongly. Many traits result from the interaction of two or more genes. Some genes result in different traits, depending upon how they are transcribed and translated. Sometimes a completely different gene can affect whether another gene is expressed. I found it interesting that squibs are more common in pureblood families. That makes perfect sense genetically, as pureblood families tend to be rather inbred, and therefore harmful mutations are more likely to show up. I tend to view being a squib as similar to a learning disability. The ability may be there (hence the fact that we will see someone do magic late in life), but because of some other factor, it is difficult to nearly impossible for the individual to actually do magic. In this case the Mendelian genetics would still work, but something else is causing the lack of magical expression. So we can work our little Punnett Squares until we are batty, but we aren't going to be able to explain all aspects of magical expression by doing it. I just finished teaching genetics to my 7th graders (I am a biologist by training with a heavy emphasis on molecular genetics) and I always find it somewhat frustrating, for they always ask questions for which there are no simple answers. Too many people think Mendelian genetics explains everything. Actually, it explains very little. Kelleyaynn From siddhu1616 at yahoo.co.in Sun Jan 15 10:10:21 2006 From: siddhu1616 at yahoo.co.in (s d) Date: Sun, 15 Jan 2006 10:10:21 +0000 (GMT) Subject: Squibs have genes to do magic? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20060115101021.2354.qmail@web8606.mail.in.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 146497 Tyler: > > Magical ability seems to come in degrees, not simply a yes/no > choice. It's not like gender--you're either a boy or a girl. > You can get a Filch or a Dumbledore or a Fudge. Some of it is > training, but not everyone can master the basic spells to > qualify for the training. s d: I do think that squibs have wizard genes as in Chamber of Secrets we could find that Filch could do KWIKSPELLS if you remember the day Nick gave him invitation for his 500th deathday! From nicholas at adelanta.co.uk Sun Jan 15 17:27:47 2006 From: nicholas at adelanta.co.uk (nicholas dean) Date: Sun, 15 Jan 2006 17:27:47 +0000 Subject: Harry's brand of magic In-Reply-To: <1137036960.1692.13811.m35@yahoogroups.com> References: <1137036960.1692.13811.m35@yahoogroups.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146498 "Harry Flashman" said:- >>>JKR is really stretching the bounds of credulity by making Harry appear to be a very ordinary wizard (even incapable of doing non-verbal spells, and useless at occlumency and leglimency), yet one who is supposed to have been marked as an equal by Voldemort. It does not add up, at the very least Harry should have some extra-ordinary skills that would make him stand out when compared to his peers. Yes ability to talk to snakes is in him, but he has no special skills when it comes to combating dark magic or even for that matter successfully overcoming the defenses of other dark wizards, so how is he supposed to fight the most powerful dark wizard of all? <<< One of my other lists posed this question just after HBP was released, and this was my response:- Have to disagree here. Harry will never be more than just okay as far as his formal studies are concerned; but he is a highly talented wizard in other respects. His magic is instinctive rather than formulaic (which is how Hermione works), hence his ability to conjure a corporeal Patronus, which even the OWL examiners thought was exceptional. He is able to resist the fake Moody's Imperius curse. He performs wandless magic when he and Dudley are threatened by Dementors. He teaches DADA to wizards older than himself. And, an excellent example from HBP, he even beats Snape to the draw in the DADA class. Snape turns his wand on Harry to demonstrate non-verbal spells, and Harry reacts with a *verbal* response that is not only faster than Snape's unvoiced spell, but is so strong that it knocks Snape over. The challenge for Harry is not to learn more magic, but to conquer his emotions and to channel the instinctive powers that he possesses. In the confrontation with Snape at the end of HBP, Harry's magic was useless, because he was so overcome with emotion at what had happened to Dumbledore. His efforts were slow and predictable, and Snape easily defended himself (whilst at the same time, and very interestingly, telling Harry exactly where he was going wrong and why the spells he was casting were ineffective!) Harry's magic is in some respects like Snape's approach to potion-making. Snape is like a talented chef who adds an apparently bizarre ingredient to a recipe, lifting it from bog-standard dish to gourmet experience. In that respect, Snape and Harry have the same touch of genius; despite their different fortes, each finds an unconventional twist to increase exponentially the power of his magic. Cheers, Nicholas From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Sun Jan 15 18:11:47 2006 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Sun, 15 Jan 2006 18:11:47 -0000 Subject: Nagini as Horcrux (Was: The Last Horcrux Still Unmade) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146499 "theadimail" > There are certain inconsistencies, it seems to me, in Dumbledore's theory about seven horcruxes. The greatest is his idea that Voldemort already has seven horcruxes. He may still be one horcrux short and still be looking for the Gryffindor object to turn it into a horcrux. > There is no evidence that he has turned Nagini into a horcrux and that too, after the murder of a foul muggle, if the whole theory of making horcruxes is to make them after a particularly important murder. > If Voldemorte had turned Nagingi into a horcrux after Frank's murder, there should have been some signifact fallout to his state. But there is none. He is still in that child-like state till Harry is kidnapped later in the novel. So what gives? > Carol responds: As Ch3 pointed out, it's six Horcruxes total, with the last soul piece remaining in Voldemort. Not that it matters. Even with Nagini as a Horcrux, there's still one Horcrux unaccounted for. (It could be the tiara in the RoM, the wand in Ollivander's window, or, heaven forfend, Harry the Horcrux.) But if Nagini is not a Horcrux, we have not one but two Horcruxes unaccounted for if Dumbledore is right about the number, and Slughorn's memory seems to indicate that he is. So let's look at the evidence for Nagini as Horcrux without considering that particular argument. I agree that LV would not have used Frank Bryce's murder to turn Nagini into a Horcrux, and not merely because Frank was insignificant. Voldie was concerned at that time with getting another body, not with obtaining immortality, which he already *had* (as long as even one Horcrux remains intact) or he wouldn't have been able to survive the deflected AK at Godric's Hollow. But eternal life on earth isn't much use if you have to be carried around in the arms of a servant who loathes and fears you (and is himself subject to mortality). But what about the possibility that Nagini became a Horcrux *before* Godric's Hollow, so that when Voldemort returned to England ca. 1970 and started gathering followers, he felt invincible because he already had all his Horcruxes? (Later, when he heard part of the Prophecy, he would have started hiding and protecting most of the Horcruxes and trying to destroy the Prophecy boy, but that's another story.) >From the little we learn about Horcruxes in HBP, they don't affect Voldie's power. He has his peculiar abilities, ranging from wandless magic and Legilimency to Parseltongue and possession, from a very early age, and he can manipulate Basilisks and cast Avada Kedavras at sixteen. He creates the diary and ring Horcruxes before he kills Hepzibah Smith at about age twenty. The Horcruxes don't affect his powers, which remain consistent (until he's vaporized and bodiless). What they affect is his appearance. We can see a change in him even in the interview with Hepzibah Smith. He's thinner and paler, but oddly still handsome. In the DADA interview, at which time he probably has made at least the locket and cup Horcruxes in addition to the diary and the ring, his features are blurred, but he doesn't yet look like the Voldemort that Harry has encountered. *He isn't yet snakelike.* But when he returns to England later and begins recruiting followers, he's unrecognizable, as Dumbledore tells us early on. When we see his face in SS/PS sticking out of Quirrell's head in SS/PS, its definitely snakelike, suggesting that he was snakelike before he was vaporized. The features of the terrible fetuslike baby!mort are also snakelike; moreover, it is "born" from a potion made from Nagini's venom and unicorn blood (IIRC). It is nurtured on her "milk" (venom). And the resurrected Voldemort, restored to a body apparently identical to his old one, is again snakelike. That this snakelike face is that of the Voldemort the DEs knew in VW1 is evident from their reactions in the graveyard. They fear his punishment for their disloyalty, they kiss the hems of his robes, they "crave" his pardon and the story of his miraculous restoration, but they are not at all surprised or horrified by his appearance. For the younger ones, at least, he has always been snakelike. And for the older ones like Nott, he has been snakelike for so long that they have almost forgotten the handsome Tom Riddle who was their schoolmate. Later we see that LV's affinity with Nagini goes beyond being able to communicate with her and promise her the corpses of his victims; he can possess her without shortening her lifespan. And she doesn't seem to have rebelled against him despite being deprived of both Wormtail and Harry. But I don't think that's all the evidence Dumbledore has to go on to deduce that Nagini is indeed a Horcrux. For me, and perhaps for DD, it's Voldie's snakelike features and his ability not only to drink her venom but to thrive on it, to require it as an essential ingredient in creating the rudimentary body that enables him to hold a wand while he waits for Harry's blood in GoF, which convinces me that Nagini is a Horcrux, and was already a Horcrux before Voldie's return to England. If Nagini is not a Horcrux, how can we account for Voldemort's snakelike features and his use of Nagini's venom to create and sustain the fetuslike baby!mort? There's more to Voldemort's relationship with Nagini than Parseltongue and a pet snake. Carol From belviso at attglobal.net Sun Jan 15 18:03:53 2006 From: belviso at attglobal.net (Magpie) Date: Sun, 15 Jan 2006 13:03:53 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Magic genetics References: Message-ID: <004c01c619fe$0cb47b20$c692400c@Spot> No: HPFGUIDX 146500 > Kelleyaynn: > I found it interesting that squibs are more common in pureblood > families. Magpie; Squibs are *not* more common in Pureblood families. There is no canon about that. -m From HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com Sun Jan 15 19:56:50 2006 From: HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com (HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com) Date: 15 Jan 2006 19:56:50 -0000 Subject: Weekly Chat, 1/15/2006, 1:00 pm Message-ID: <1137355010.12.91013.m33@yahoogroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 146501 Reminder from the Calendar of HPforGrownups http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/cal Weekly Chat Sunday January 15, 2006 1:00 pm - 1:00 pm (This event repeats every week.) Notes: Don't forget, chat happens today, 11 am Pacific, 2 pm Eastern, 7 pm UK time. Chat times do not change for Daylight Saving/Summer Time. Chat generally goes on for about 5 hours, but can last as long as people want it to last. To get into Chat, just go to the group online: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups and click on "Chat" in the lefthand menu. If you have problems with this, go to http://www.yahoo.com and in the bottom box on the left side of the page click on "Chat". Once you're logged into any room, type /join *g.HPforGrownups ; this should take you right in. If you have an Set up birthday reminders! http://us.rd.yahoo.com/cal_us/rem/?http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/cal?v=9&evt_type=13 Copyright 2006 Yahoo! Inc. All Rights Reserved. http://www.yahoo.com Privacy Policy: http://privacy.yahoo.com/ Terms of Service: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Sun Jan 15 20:03:26 2006 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Sun, 15 Jan 2006 20:03:26 -0000 Subject: "Blood" vs. genetics in the HP books (Was: Magic genetics) In-Reply-To: <004c01c619fe$0cb47b20$c692400c@Spot> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146502 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Magpie" wrote: > > > > Kelleyaynn: > > I found it interesting that squibs are more common in pureblood > > families. > > Magpie; > > Squibs are *not* more common in Pureblood families. There is no canon about > that. > > -m Carol responds: I don't want to make a blanket assertion in case I'm wrong, but I think Magpie is correct. I'm not aware of any canon indicating that Squibs are more common in pureblood families than mixed blood families. (Obviously, Squibs would not occur in all-Muggle families; the children would either be nonmagical Muggles or Muggleborn witches or wizards like Hermione and Lily.) Based on JKR's attempt to answer the genetics question on her website ("the wizarding gene is dominant and resilient"), I'd say that her knowledge of genetics is on a par with her "maths," weak at best. Most likely she didn't really think about the question when she worked out the plot of her books. She merely needed three basic types of witches and wizards as represented by HRH: Purebloods (Ron), half-bloods with one Muggleborn or Muggle parent (Harry), and Muggleborns (Hermione). Interestingly, in SS/PS, only two types exist for the little bigot Draco: those whose parents are a witch and a wizard and "the other kind." But JKR probably didn't want to complicate matters at that early point: The concepts of Squibs and Muggleborns are introduced in CoS, where her focus is on the Heir of Slytherin seeking out Muggleborns for the monster to petrify or kill. While we've encountered quite a few Muggleborns, two of whom we know to be highly gifted witches, we know of only two real Squibs (plus the presumed Weasley Squib who chose to become an accountant). Neville's pureblood family feared that he was a Squib, probably because he didn't exhibit the usual early signs of magic, and Merope was called a Squib by her evil and abusive pureblood father, but neither of these examples is evidence that Squibs *usually* occur in pureblood families because neither Neville nor Merope is actually a Squib. And we have no idea of the parentage of Mrs. Figg (whose maiden name we don't know) or Filch. Obviously at least one and probably both parents of Figgy and Filch were wizards, but we don't know their blood status. (We do know from JKR's website that Filch's Kwikspell course never worked.) While I like the highly informed and ingenious arguments that would allow both Squibs and Muggleborns to exist if the wizarding gene is both recessive and part of a complex involving at least one other gene that determines the level of a wizard's power, I don't think that's what JKR had in mind (as evidenced by her scientifically inaccurate response on her website). I think she had in mind that most wizards have "mixed blood," with even the "purebloods" being not really "pure, as "purebloods" sometime (often?) marry "half-bloods." As long as the "half-bloods," like Harry, have a witch and a wizard as parents (one or the other being a Muggleborn), the "purebloods" can claim, like Ernie MacMillan, to trace their wizard ancestry back, say, twelve generations. The Muggle parents of the Muggleborn ancestor simply don't appear on the genealogical charts. It's only the "other kind," the Muggleborns, who are shunned as marriage partners by the more bigoted "purebloods" like the Malfoys, who fear contamination by the "Mudbloods." My guess is that they fear that the nonmagical "blood" will contaminate their offspring and increase the chance of producing a Squib descendant. At any rate, setting aside JKR's rather muddled idea of genetics, we never hear the terms "gene" or "genetics" spoken by any wizard, not even Dumbledore. It's always "blood." Interestingly, we hear a similar view from, of all people, Aunt Marge, the pure Muggle sister of Uncle Vernon (Harry's uncle by marriage, who shares none of his "blood"). Aunt Marge not only compares human marriage to dog breeding (in which champions have to be purebreds), she goes so far as to say that the mother's "blood" matters more than the father's: "If there's something wrong with the bitch, there's something wrong with the pup." So she's implying that something is wrong with Lily's "blood" (she hastily explains to Petunia that such things can occur even in the best of families, but still it's the Evans line, not the Dursley line, that contains the bad "blood"). Ironically, it's Lily's "blood" that, through Petunia, provides protection to the underage Harry as long as he can call 4 Privet Drive home. So despite Dumbledore's rejection of the term "Mudblood" and the "pureblood" prejudice that goes with it, he still, like most of the wizards we see in the HP books, thinks in terms of "blood," not genes. Maybe Aunt Marge is wrong about the mother's blood counting more than the father's (Hagrid, for example, is more like his gentle wizard father than his giant mother who abandoned him when he was three: "It's not in their natures" to be motherly, Hagrid says), but still, the concept of "blood" does seem to have some validity within the books. On a sidenote, heredity as we understand it does seem to operate in terms of physical features and certain talents, such as Harry's skills at flying and Quidditch that he inherited from James, but just possibly those skills are in his "blood" rather than in his genes. And "blood" traits can be acquired through "blood" sacrifice and even transferred, quite literally through the blood, to other wizards ("I can touch him now," gloats Voldemort after Harry's blood has helped to resurrect him.) All this is to say that I don't think debates on genetics will lead us anywhere. Like the breeders of racehorses and show dogs, and like the members of European royal houses who for centuries would marry only others with "royal blood," the inhabitants of the Potterverse see magical abilities and magic itself as inherited through the "blood." For that reason, Muggleborns (who, in our view, *must* have magical genes) are viewed by wizards who care about bloodlines as interlopers, nothing more than Muggles who have somehow invaded the WW. Voldemort himself holds this view, equating the Muggleborn Lily Evans Potter with his own Muggle father in both CoS (as Diary!Tom) and GoF. Salazar Slytherin, Lucius Malfoy, and even the twelve-year-old Draco of CoS want to root them out, not because they carry nonmagical genes (they clearly neither know nor care about such Muggle concepts) but because their blood is "dirty"--nonmagical and therefore contaminated (in their view). If neither parent has wizard "blood," neither does the child, whether or not he or she can perform magic. A Muggleborn is, in their view, no better than a Muggle. If we tried to explain magical inheritance to Draco in terms of dominant or recessive genes, he would have no idea what we were talking about. He "knows," as Aunt Marge "knows," that it's all in the "blood." Please note that I am *not* arguing in favor of "blood" prejudice in any form or accusing JKR of such prejudice, just trying to grasp how the concepts of "blood" and "bloodlines" work in the books without bringing in the alien Muggle concept of genetics. Carol, who would love to have inherited the magical gene or genes of her "witch" ancestor, Martha Carrier, but whose "blood" is pure Muggle by WW standards From a_svirn at yahoo.com Sun Jan 15 20:42:15 2006 From: a_svirn at yahoo.com (a_svirn) Date: Sun, 15 Jan 2006 20:42:15 -0000 Subject: Harry Vanquishing LV without killing him. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146503 > Geoff: > Yes, but with respect, Shakespeare also gives us the other side of > the coin: > > THIRD APPARITION: > .... > Macbeth shall never vanquish'd be, until > Great Birnam Wood, to high Dunsinane Hill > Shall come against him. > (The Tragedy of Macbeth, Act IV, Scene I) > > The way in which Shakespeare worked this prophecy out - as a bit of a > con - absolutely incensed J.R.R.Tolkien and was a factor in his > creation of the Ents. > > An interesting point which crossed my mind when typing this quote was > the use of "vanquish'd".... > > Familiar? > a_svirn: Actually, that's what I meant when I said that the Prophesy was literal ? that it was a bit of a con. Macbeth thought that "no man of woman born" meant *no one*, and since trees aren't capable moving and climbing hills the "Birnam Wood prophesy" meant *never*. Thus interpreting both prophesies metaphorically. Yet they were both very much literal ? implied cesarean section and a bit of cover-up military action respectively. From bex753 at yahoo.co.uk Sun Jan 15 17:54:28 2006 From: bex753 at yahoo.co.uk (Brian W) Date: Sun, 15 Jan 2006 17:54:28 -0000 Subject: Squibs have genes to do magic? References: <20060115101021.2354.qmail@web8606.mail.in.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <002c01c619fc$bb3b3370$6501a8c0@quietpc> No: HPFGUIDX 146504 > s d wrote: > I do think that squibs have wizard genes as in Chamber of > Secrets we could find that Filch could do KWIKSPELLS if you > remember the day Nick gave him invitation for his 500th deathday! > > JKR has stated that the Kwickspell course would be no good to Filch as he is a squib Misc/squib on her site "Squibs would not be able to attend Hogwarts as students. They are often doomed to a rather sad kind of half-life (yes, you should be feeling sorry for Filch), as their parentage often means that they will be exposed to, if not immersed in, the wizarding community, but can never truly join it. Sometimes they find a way to fit in; Filch has carved himself a niche at Hogwarts and Arabella Figg operates as Dumbledore's liaison between the magical and Muggle worlds. Neither of these characters can perform magic (Filch's Kwikspell course never worked), but they still function within the wizarding world because they have access to certain magical objects and creatures that can help them (Arabella Figg does a roaring trade in cross-bred cats and Kneazles, and if you don't know what a Kneazle is yet, shame on you). Incidentally, Arabella Figg never saw the Dementors that attacked Harry and Dudley, but she had enough magical knowledge to identify correctly the sensations they created in the alleyway." bex753 From hickengruendler at yahoo.de Sun Jan 15 21:42:32 2006 From: hickengruendler at yahoo.de (hickengruendler) Date: Sun, 15 Jan 2006 21:42:32 -0000 Subject: Snape's loyalties WAS: Re: HBP: Why I am 98.6% certain that... In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146505 > > Ltrain138: > Something to consider: IF Snape is really good than he has managed to > hoodwink the most powerful Occlumens in the world (Voldemort). If he > has achieved that, his power is far greater than I could have imagined. > Ltrain138. > Hickengruendler: You mean Legilimens, I suppose. Occlumeny is what Dumbledore wanted Snape to teach Harry: Shutting your mind from Legilimency "attacks". But anyway, I wanted to say something else: I would argue that Dumbledore is as good a Legilimens as Voldemort is. He surely was able to see through Tom Riddle by simply looking at him. I do think he doesn't make as much use of this power as Voldemort does, but I think in special circumstances he would. Therefore no matter on which side Snape is, he definitely was able to hoodwink a great Legilimens (or maybe two, if he is on his own side). Hickengruendler From kjones at telus.net Sun Jan 15 22:00:58 2006 From: kjones at telus.net (Kathryn Jones) Date: Sun, 15 Jan 2006 14:00:58 -0800 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Nagini as Horcrux (Was: The Last Horcrux Still Unmade) In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <43CAC619.6070103@telus.net> No: HPFGUIDX 146506 > >From the little we learn about Horcruxes in HBP, they don't affect > Voldie's power. He has his peculiar abilities, ranging from wandless > magic and Legilimency to Parseltongue and possession, from a very > early age, and he can manipulate Basilisks and cast Avada Kedavras at > sixteen. He creates the diary and ring Horcruxes before he kills > Hepzibah Smith at about age twenty. The Horcruxes don't affect his > powers, which remain consistent (until he's vaporized and bodiless). > What they affect is his appearance. We can see a change in him even in > the interview with Hepzibah Smith. He's thinner and paler, but oddly > still handsome. In the DADA interview, at which time he probably has > made at least the locket and cup Horcruxes in addition to the diary > and the ring, his features are blurred, but he doesn't yet look like > the Voldemort that Harry has encountered. *He isn't yet snakelike.* > > But when he returns to England later and begins recruiting followers, > he's unrecognizable, as Dumbledore tells us early on. When we see his > face in SS/PS sticking out of Quirrell's head in SS/PS, its definitely > snakelike, suggesting that he was snakelike before he was vaporized. > The features of the terrible fetuslike baby!mort are also snakelike; > moreover, it is "born" from a potion made from Nagini's venom and > unicorn blood (IIRC). It is nurtured on her "milk" (venom). And the > resurrected Voldemort, restored to a body apparently identical to his > old one, is again snakelike. KJ writes: While I agree with much of this, there are a few things I see differently. We know that Riddle killed his father and grandparents in his sixth year and graduated in 1945. JKR has also suggested that this time coincided with the death of Grindlewald who I suspect had something to do with Riddle learning how to make horcruxes. Riddle told Harry that he "left behind a diary" preserving his sixteen year old self so that he could influence someone else. I think that Tom tried to get into Hogwarts to retrieve the diary, which we know he did or he could not have made it into a horcrux later. We know that after graduation Tom tried to get hired by Dippet. I think that this was his first attempt to get the diary. I think that the ring was his first horcrux using the soul split caused by the death of his father. After graduation, he worked for B&B for a while and acquired the locket and cup. He also murdered a decendant of Helga Hufflepuff. He then disappeared, not in 1945 as is stated in the Lexicon. It would have been in '46 or '47. Ten years later, he was back to again apply for work at Hogwarts. I think that is when he reacquired the diary. The information on non-verbal spells, the hand-movement Voldemort made when he left, and Dumbledore's suspicion that he was there for another purpose, I think are all clues. His appearance would indicate that he had made at least two horcruxes. He told Dumbledore that he had pushed the boundaries of magic further than they had ever been pushed. This would only have to be two horcruxes, the ring and the cup, or the ring and the locket. He had already begun to recruit followers at that time. Dumbledore listed Nott, Rosier, Mulciber and Dolohov as already being named "Death Eaters". During his travels,he then made his third horcrux by using the diary and the death of Grindlewald which he eventually gave to Lucius for safe-keeping. I believe he would have used those years away locating a descendant of Ravenclaw to use for the fourth horcrux which is likely to be the wand that Ollivander has disappeared with and an appropriate death to use for the locket, the fifth horcrux. When he returned in 1970 he began hiding the horcruxes or giving some of them to his DE's. We know that he gave the diary to Lucius and we suspect that he gave the cup to Bella. The locket was hidden in the cave, the ring was hidden in the Gaunt house, and if the wand is the fifth, it is unaccounted for. I believe that Harry's death, Voldemort's "equal" was to be used to make the sixth horcrux, which is another reason that Voldemort is still pursuing him. The DE's have orders to leave Harry for him personally. On Voldemort's return, he stated that he had gone further on the path to immortality than any other wizard. He did not say that he had completed the journey. Considering the fact that he is no snakier now than he was on his return, I do not believe that he has made Nagini a horcrux. I suspect that as a result of the backlash caused by the rebounded spell, a splinter of soul hit Harry, causing his scar and the transfer of powers, making Harry the sixth unintended horcrux. Perhaps Nagini will come into it on the basis of the blood transfer. The snake may be unable to differentiate between Harry and Voldemort at a crucial moment because of the soul pieces and the blood. Perhaps she will be the instrument of Voldemort's downfall. That would be ironic. Perhaps Harry's nature would prevent Voldemort from accessing that final soul piece. KJ From fuzz876i at yahoo.com Sun Jan 15 21:51:41 2006 From: fuzz876i at yahoo.com (fuzz876i) Date: Sun, 15 Jan 2006 21:51:41 -0000 Subject: re vanquishing LV without killing him Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146507 I hate to say this but I disagree with just vanquishing Voldemort, because he came back after being vanquished the first time why not a second time if vanquished. The prophecy does say that neither can live while the other survives. So when you come right down to it Harry must try to kill Voldemort even if he does not succeed then he could say that he at least tried. The classes with Dumbledore were leading up to Harry facing Voldemort in the future. So why not face and destroy the man or thing that killed your parents. Fuzz From bawilson at citynet.net Sun Jan 15 22:30:52 2006 From: bawilson at citynet.net (Bruce Alan Wilson) Date: Sun, 15 Jan 2006 17:30:52 -0500 Subject: Wizardling Genetics Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146508 My knowledge of genetics is rather sketchy, but I don't think from what we have seen that wizardry is a matter of a single gene; it is a complex of genes. Mr. Filch and Mrs. Figg can see spirits and sense magical energies and use magical artifacts (which Muggles can't do), but they can't manipulate them as full wizards can. Then there are special magical abilities like being a Seer, an Animagus, or a Metamorphomagus; it seems that one either can or can't do these things--training may enable one to do them better, but if one hasn't the basic ability, all the training in the world won't do any good. Hence, there seem to be three components: 1. The ability to sense magical energies; 2. The ability to manipulate magical energies; 3. Specialized magical abilities. If one has 1 & 2, one is a wizard; if one has 1 or 3 (or both?) without 2, one is a Squib. (Or that is how I read it.) Now, it seems that none of these three things are controlled by just one gene--several people have pointed out that there are several things we have seen in the background of the stories contraindicates this. Hence, a combination of genes seems to be the solution. It would explain why, for example, a family can go for generations--to the point where any wizardling heritage is forgotten--before it produces a witch/wizard, and why wizards and witches who marry other wizards/witches seldom produce children without some magical ability. On the other hand, as few if any Wizards know enough about Muggle science to investigate the matter properly, it will have to be a mystery. In any case, when JKR said that wizardry was 'dominant', I'm sure she didn't mean it in the technical sense that biologists mean it. Bruce Alan Wilson [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk Sun Jan 15 22:36:03 2006 From: gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk (Geoff Bannister) Date: Sun, 15 Jan 2006 22:36:03 -0000 Subject: Harry Vanquishing LV without killing him. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146509 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "a_svirn" wrote: > > > Geoff: > > Yes, but with respect, Shakespeare also gives us the other side of > > the coin: > > > > THIRD APPARITION: > > .... > > Macbeth shall never vanquish'd be, until > > Great Birnam Wood, to high Dunsinane Hill > > Shall come against him. > > (The Tragedy of Macbeth, Act IV, Scene I) > > > > The way in which Shakespeare worked this prophecy out - as a bit > of a > > con - absolutely incensed J.R.R.Tolkien and was a factor in his > > creation of the Ents. > > > > An interesting point which crossed my mind when typing this quote > was > > the use of "vanquish'd".... > > > > Familiar? > > > a_svirn: > Actually, that's what I meant when I said that the Prophesy was > literal ? that it was a bit of a con. Macbeth thought that "no man > of woman born" meant *no one*, and since trees aren't capable moving > and climbing hills the "Birnam Wood prophesy" meant *never*. Thus > interpreting both prophesies metaphorically. Yet they were both very > much literal ? implied cesarean section and a bit of cover-up > military action respectively. Geoff: Hm. My comment was intended to point up that the prophecies differed in that the second was more literally fulfilled than the third. Being the father of three offspring who were all born by Caesarean section, I can see what the prophecy was driving at; it was open to being considered true whereas the third definitely wasn't. From gav_fiji at yahoo.com Sun Jan 15 22:57:35 2006 From: gav_fiji at yahoo.com (Goddlefrood) Date: Sun, 15 Jan 2006 22:57:35 -0000 Subject: Snape's Opinion of himself (Was: Snape's loyalties) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146510 > Hickengruendler: > Therefore no matter on which side > Snape is, he definitely was able to hoodwink a great Legilimens (or > maybe two, if he is on his own side). Goddlefrood: As Snape himslef answered to one of Bellatrix's questions in Spinner's End how could he possibly occlude his thoughts from the greatest Legilimens of all time? (meaning LV). Bellatrix bought this, but Snape was rather boastful throughout that chapter, and indeed throughout the series. Probably with some justification as he appears to be in the top three most powerful wizards in the series. I sincerely hope that Snape will turn out to be "good" as Harry will have severe problems if he is truly with LV. Perhaps Aberforth will transpire to be an extraordinarily powerful ally for Harry, but even then Snape and LV on the same side would be a formidable opposition, not to mention Bellatrix and the often underestimated Peter. One piece of evidence that is apparently overlooked in the whole Snape debate is that he never betrayed Remus to Greyback (and who would?). Snape would not be much of a spy if he was unaware of Remus's role now would he? TTFN Goddlefrood From a_svirn at yahoo.com Sun Jan 15 23:02:12 2006 From: a_svirn at yahoo.com (a_svirn) Date: Sun, 15 Jan 2006 23:02:12 -0000 Subject: Harry Vanquishing LV without killing him. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146511 > > a_svirn: > > Actually, that's what I meant when I said that the Prophesy was > > literal ? that it was a bit of a con. Macbeth thought that "no man > > of woman born" meant *no one*, and since trees aren't capable > moving > > and climbing hills the "Birnam Wood prophesy" meant *never*. Thus > > interpreting both prophesies metaphorically. Yet they were both > very > > much literal ? implied cesarean section and a bit of cover-up > > military action respectively. > > Geoff: > Hm. My comment was intended to point up that the prophecies differed > in that the second was more literally fulfilled than the third. > > Being the father of three offspring who were all born by Caesarean > section, I can see what the prophecy was driving at; it was open to > being considered true whereas the third definitely wasn't. a_svirn: Why not, both of them are true. The difference between the second and the third is that the third is contrived ? a bit like with the (in)famous prophesy of Merlin concerning the Prince of Wales. It was said supposedly that a Prince of Wales would be crowned in London and everyone assumed that Merlin meant a Welsh Prince (from the House of Llewellyn apparently) until Edward I found a perfect solution ?created his own son and hire the Prince of Wales. In this instance one literal meaning was cunningly replaced by another literal meaning. In Macbeth's third prophesy a metaphorical meaning was cunningly replaced by a literal one. From h2so3f at yahoo.com Sun Jan 15 23:11:51 2006 From: h2so3f at yahoo.com (h2so3f) Date: Sun, 15 Jan 2006 23:11:51 -0000 Subject: Snape's loyalties WAS: Re: HBP: Why I am 98.6% certain that... In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146512 Ltrain138 wrote: " Something to consider: IF Snape is really good than he has managed to hoodwink the most powerful Occlumens in the world (Voldemort). If he has achieved that, his power is far greater than I could have imagined." Hickengruendler responded: " I would argue that Dumbledore is as good a Legilimens as Voldemort is. He surely was able to see through Tom Riddle by simply looking at him... Therefore no matter on which side Snape is, he definitely was able to hoodwink a great Legilimens (or maybe two, if he is on his own side). CH3ed: Considering that Voldy imposed Wormtail on Snape's residence (very probably) to spy on Snape, I don't think Snape had successfully hoodwinked Voldy... or DD, for that matter. I think Voldy has plenty of doubts about Snape's loyalty (but a lot of it would have been eased by his murdering DD in front of other DEs), but is not exposing or killing Snape until he is no longer useful. I'm not convinced that Snape had hoodwinked DD either. I don't think Harry's interpretation of what the reason Snape defected from LV's rank the first time was is correct (Snape felt guilty about his ratting about the prophesy leading to James' murder). And that passage where DD said that his being smarter than most also means his mistakes are bigger than most, may just turn out to be a harmless statement of humility like when DD conceded to Mme. Maxime in GoF that he could have made a mistake with the age line around the GoF. I think Snape is more effective in not answering questions directly or in witholding information, than in outright lying to great ligilimens like DD and Voldy. CH3ed :O) From gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk Sun Jan 15 23:24:06 2006 From: gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk (Geoff Bannister) Date: Sun, 15 Jan 2006 23:24:06 -0000 Subject: Harry Vanquishing LV without killing him. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146513 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "a_svirn" wrote: Geoff: > > Hm. My comment was intended to point up that the prophecies > differed > > in that the second was more literally fulfilled than the third. > > > > Being the father of three offspring who were all born by Caesarean > > section, I can see what the prophecy was driving at; it was open > to > > being considered true whereas the third definitely wasn't. > > > a_svirn: > Why not, both of them are true. The difference between the second > and the third is that the third is contrived ? a bit like with the > (in)famous prophesy of Merlin concerning the Prince of Wales. It was > said supposedly that a Prince of Wales would be crowned in London > and everyone assumed that Merlin meant a Welsh Prince (from the > House of Llewellyn apparently) until Edward I found a perfect > solution ?created his own son and hire the Prince of Wales. In this > instance one literal meaning was cunningly replaced by another > literal meaning. In Macbeth's third prophesy a metaphorical meaning > was cunningly replaced by a literal one. Geoff: I see it as the other way round - the prophecy appeared to Macbeth to be a literal one and hence could not be fulfilled but the outcome was a metaphorical interpretation of what the witches prophesied. By the by, I think you mean "son and heir". I don't think that Edward I borrowed his son from the local library.. :-)) From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Sun Jan 15 23:42:36 2006 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Sun, 15 Jan 2006 23:42:36 -0000 Subject: Snape's loyalties and DD mistakes WAS: Re: HBP: Why I am 98.6% certain that... In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146514 CH3ed: > I'm not convinced that Snape had hoodwinked DD either. I don't think > Harry's interpretation of what the reason Snape defected from LV's > rank the first time was is correct (Snape felt guilty about his > ratting about the prophesy leading to James' murder). And that > passage where DD said that his being smarter than most also means > his mistakes are bigger than most, may just turn out to be a > harmless statement of humility like when DD conceded to Mme. Maxime > in GoF that he could have made a mistake with the age line around > the GoF. I think Snape is more effective in not answering questions > directly or in witholding information, than in outright lying to > great ligilimens like DD and Voldy. Alla: Hmmm. I am not sure about Dumbledore's mistakes not really being mistakes. JKR pretty much said it didn't she in the July 2005 interview? "ES: How can someone so - JKR: Intelligent - ES: be so blind with regard to certain things? JKR: Well, there is information on that to come, in seven. But I would say that I think it has been demonstrated, particularly in books five and six that immense brainpower does not protect you from emotional mistakes and I think Dumbledore really exemplifies that." Now, don't get me wrong, it is certainly possible IMO that we will find out that Dumbledore was NOT fooled by Snape and Snape is loyal to him till the end( it is not a concession, but just me trying to keep all possibilities in mind in order not to be too dissapointed at the end, if what I think will happen and what I would like to happen will not come true :-)), but IMO IF we find out that DD was wrong, the books foreshadowed the fact that Dumbledore can make emotional mistakes really well and those mistakes IMO are huge. ( him dealing with Harry and Sirius in OOP, him not sharing information about Tom Riddle, etc.) So, I won't think of Dumbledore any less if it turns out that his trust in Snape was not justified, it will just make him more human in my eyes. As to Snape hoodwinking greatest Legilimens, yes, I don't see it any either way. IMO he either fooled DD or Voldie or both. JMO of course, Alla From a_svirn at yahoo.com Sun Jan 15 23:54:24 2006 From: a_svirn at yahoo.com (a_svirn) Date: Sun, 15 Jan 2006 23:54:24 -0000 Subject: Harry Vanquishing LV without killing him. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146515 > Geoff: > I see it as the other way round - the prophecy appeared to Macbeth to > be a literal one and hence could not be fulfilled but the outcome was > a metaphorical interpretation of what the witches prophesied. a_svirn: I guess it depends on how we understand *metaphorical*. When I say that Macbeth interpreted "no man of woman born" and "until //Great Birnam Wood, to high Dunsinane Hill" metaphorically I mean that he saw these phrases as nothing more than figures of speech meaning *no one* and *never*. And that's what metaphor is ? a figure of speech. As it turned out, however, the meaning was literal and not at all figurative. > Geoff: > By the by, I think you mean "son and heir". I don't think that Edward > I borrowed his son from the local library.. > :-)) > a_svirn: I suppose. He would have done a better job of it if it had been this easy. I only meant to stress that he had *his* son proclaimed the Prince (rather than Llewellyn's). But you are right, the emphasis was unnecessary. From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Mon Jan 16 00:03:38 2006 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2006 00:03:38 -0000 Subject: Birthday Lists / Re: Who dies in 7? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146516 > Potioncat: > If you go to one of the timelines at the Lexicon you can find > birthdays. I'm not sure if it will tell you if the information came > from JKR's calendar or not. It might be an interesting idea to see who > isn't there. I've always been more concerned with who was there. I was > very surprised that she wished Draco a happy birthday...although it > makes more sense after the HBP. > Alla: Out of curiosity - why were you more concerned with those characters who are on the list? Do you mean simply because you care about the characters on the list more than about those who are absent, because those who are absent ( and alive at the moment) are IMO secondary characters? If that is what you meant, I agree. I also care about those who are on the list more ( for the most part of course). That is of course assuming that birthday theory is true, which I would love to be, if not of course all bets are off on who lives an dies. :-) As to Draco, well, yeah, I was surprised of course but for the different reason - I was inclined to believe that those who are on the list do not serve Voldemort, but as you said it makes more sense after HBP. I can totally see Draco surviving, the main question for me though is what kind of person he will be after he survives - the new Snape or somebody better than that? JMO of course, Alla From kchuplis at alltel.net Mon Jan 16 00:35:22 2006 From: kchuplis at alltel.net (Karen) Date: Sun, 15 Jan 2006 18:35:22 -0600 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Draco again (was: Birthday Lists / Re: Who dies in 7?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146517 On Sunday, January 15, 2006, at 06:03 PM, dumbledore11214 wrote: > I can totally see Draco surviving, the main question for me though is > what kind? of person he will be after he survives - the new Snape or > somebody better than that? > You know, I know it is assumed that Draco will die in 7, but I see Draco as having the potential to be something. He's kind of like "The Dudley Who Could Reform". I don't think Draco has ever been able to see living past some perceived "child of the head DE". It's entirely possible that DDM!Snape (or even OFH!Snape) is not going to be able to return to LV at this point (ESE!Snape certainly could, but let's postulate on the other). So, he's a free agent loose with Draco. It's quite possible that a year on the run with Snape, outside of Parental Expectations at that age where kids are pretty influenceable might work some major differences in Draco. Snape has never been fair to Gryffindor students, particularly those that hang with Harry, but we've never seen what he is like with other students. Personally, I wouldn't be upset at a different Draco emerging. It really is possible to have character's that are strong and not necessarily evil that are also not Harry's friend. kchuplis From agdisney at msn.com Mon Jan 16 00:38:27 2006 From: agdisney at msn.com (Andrea Grevera) Date: Sun, 15 Jan 2006 19:38:27 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Dumbledor References: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146518 ..he won't return as himself but most likely in Phoenix form to aid Harry in his journey... Does that sound totally ridiculous? Cltravis Andie: It does & it doesn't. I remember somewhere (don't know where right now) that Harry is supposed to acquire a Phoenix before all this is over. Maybe the Phoenix will be DD. Just a thought [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Mon Jan 16 01:23:32 2006 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2006 01:23:32 -0000 Subject: Draco again and Dumbledore as Phoenix In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146519 kchuplis: > You know, I know it is assumed that Draco will die in 7, but I see > Draco as having the potential to be something. Alla: Heee, I don't think Draco dying as a definite assumption at all. Cannot stand him as of now, but certainly agree with you that after HBP he can go in to changing direction. kchuplis: Personally, I wouldn't > be upset at a different Draco emerging. It really is possible to have > character's that are strong and not necessarily evil that are also not > Harry's friend. Alla: Oh, of course. To me in order to respect Draco's character he has to realise that pureblood bigotry is WRONG ( that is of course just my requirement - I realise that others may love the character the way he is now). It is NOT a requirement to me for Draco's character to become Harry's friend at all, really. > Andie: > I remember somewhere (don't know where right now) that Harry is > supposed to acquire a Phoenix before all this is over. Maybe the Phoenix will be > DD. > Just a thought Alla: Interesting. Could you maybe find a quote if not now then later? Pretty please? :- I do remember the reference being made in the past that Jo supposedly said that Harry will acquire new pet (without saying which pet), but I am not even sure that she said that. I could be wrong of course. JMO, Alla From kchuplis at alltel.net Mon Jan 16 01:48:37 2006 From: kchuplis at alltel.net (Karen) Date: Sun, 15 Jan 2006 19:48:37 -0600 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Dumbledor In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <3614EF86-8632-11DA-A9AB-000393B04DDE@alltel.net> No: HPFGUIDX 146520 On Sunday, January 15, 2006, at 06:38 PM, Andrea Grevera wrote: > > ? > ? ..he won't return as himself but most likely in Phoenix form to > ? aid Harry in his journey... > ? Does that sound totally ridiculous? > ? Cltravis > > ? Andie: > ? It does & it doesn't.? I remember somewhere (don't know where right > now) that Harry is > ? supposed to acquire a Phoenix before all this is over.? Maybe the > Phoenix will be > ? DD. > ? Just a thought > > > > That is really interesting because since I first read that chapter I've been wondering..."where do phoenixes come from?" Is there any thing in Fantastic Creatures regarding them? After all, we know that basilisks are hatched from chicken eggs. This idea has actually flitted through my mind but I never brought it up before. I'm glad you did. Anyone know more about them? kchuplis From luckdragon64 at yahoo.ca Mon Jan 16 02:18:37 2006 From: luckdragon64 at yahoo.ca (Luckdragon) Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2006 02:18:37 -0000 Subject: Birthday Lists / Re: Who dies in 7? In-Reply-To: <20060114120753.18176.qmail@web25302.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146521 > sunnylove0 at a... wrote: > > Of course we do have the Birthday Theory, that all characters > > who are wished a Happy Birthday in 2005/2006 are still alive > > to celebrate. > > > > Both Albus Dumbledore and Sirius Black are left off the > > birthday lists, and so are Tonks and Trelawney. > > > Becky asks: > > This is interesting, I haven't heard of this before. Where are > the birthday lists? I can't find them. Luckdragon: A good timeline including known character birthdates can be found at the following url. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dates_in_Harry_Potter From agdisney at msn.com Mon Jan 16 02:19:55 2006 From: agdisney at msn.com (Andrea Grevera) Date: Sun, 15 Jan 2006 21:19:55 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Draco again and Dumbledore as Phoenix References: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146522 > Andie: > I remember somewhere (don't know where right now) that Harry is > supposed to acquire a Phoenix before all this is over. Maybe the Phoenix will be > DD. > Just a thought Alla: Interesting. Could you maybe find a quote if not now then later? Pretty please? :- I do remember the reference being made in the past that Jo supposedly said that Harry will acquire new pet (without saying which pet), but I am not even sure that she said that. I could be wrong of course. Andie: I found the quote on acquiring a new pet from Quick quotes 2001 Raincoast books interview. they ask if Harry could have a pet dragon. She say's no "He's got more sense. He might get a different pet at some point." I'm looking for the other one but my labradoodle is trying to learn to type with her nose so... time to give up. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From agdisney at msn.com Mon Jan 16 02:23:49 2006 From: agdisney at msn.com (Andrea Grevera) Date: Sun, 15 Jan 2006 21:23:49 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Dumbledor References: <3614EF86-8632-11DA-A9AB-000393B04DDE@alltel.net> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146523 That is really interesting because since I first read that chapter I've been wondering..."where do phoenixes come from?" Is there any thing in Fantastic Creatures regarding them? After all, we know that basilisks are hatched from chicken eggs. This idea has actually flitted through my mind but I never brought it up before. I'm glad you did. Anyone know more about them? kchuplis Andie: According to Fantastic Beasts, a Phoenix nests on mountain peaks & is found in Egypt, India, & China. The Phoenix is a gentle creature that has never been known to kill and eats only herbs. Hope this helps. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From luckdragon64 at yahoo.ca Mon Jan 16 02:24:21 2006 From: luckdragon64 at yahoo.ca (Luckdragon) Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2006 02:24:21 -0000 Subject: Birthday List Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146524 Luckdragon: List of all known birthdates and zodiac signs of fictional characters in the Harry Potter book series. Dobby - June 28th (Cancer) Filius Flitwick - October 17th (Libra) Hermione Granger - September 19th, 1979 (Virgo) Rubeus Hagrid - December 6th, 1928 (Sagittarius) Neville Longbottom - July 30th, 1980 (Leo) Remus Lupin - March 10th, 1960 (Pisces) Draco Malfoy - June 5th, 1980 (Gemini) Minerva McGonagall - October 4th (Libra) Harry Potter - July 31st, 1980 (Leo) Severus Snape - January 9th, 1960 (Capricorn) Pomona Sprout - May 15th (Taurus) Lord Voldemort - December 31st, 1926 (Capricorn) Arthur Weasley - February 6th (Aquarius) Bill Weasley - November 29th, 1971 (Sagittarius) Charlie Weasley - December 12th, 1973 (Sagittarius) Fred Weasley - April 1st, 1978 (Aries) George Weasley - April 1st, 1978 (Aries) Ginny Weasley - August 11th, 1981 (Leo) Molly Weasley - October 30th (Scorpio) Percy Weasley - August 22nd, 1976 (Leo) Ron Weasley - March 1st, 1980 (Pisces) Dudley Dursley -June 23rd, 1980 (Cancer) Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harry_Potter_characters_birthday_l ist" From catlady at wicca.net Mon Jan 16 02:56:01 2006 From: catlady at wicca.net (Catlady (Rita Prince Winston)) Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2006 02:56:01 -0000 Subject: Carol/La Gatta Lucianese/Jen/La Gatta again/SSSusan/Luckdragon/Carol again Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146525 Tim (my DH) has a theory that I promised to pass on to the list: he thinks that Snape and Dumbledore switched places so that it was really Snape who was killed and Dumbledore who cast AK. Carol wrote in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/146155 : << As we see at the Yule Ball, he takes ten points each from Ravenclaw and Hufflepuff for rule breaking (Miss Fawcett and a boy whose name I can't remember making out in the rosebushes) >> I don't recall it being made clear to me that there was a rule against making out in the rosebushes (or elsewhere). I got the impression that Snape was blasting rosebushes and took points from those of the fleeing students whom he could identify in the dark simply out of Snapish spite. La Gatta Lucianese wrote in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/146163 : << Are veela akin to vilias, viljas, and wilis? >> Yes. Jen wrote in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/146171 : << You'd think being a metamorphmagus would make learning the animagus transformations much easier! But Hermione didn't recognize Tonks as one of the seven registered for the century and I think her name would ring a bell for Hermione if she'd read it before. >> Hermione read the Animagus Registry early in PoA, altho' she didn't tell about it until the end. So Tonks was two years out of Hogwarts when Hermione read the Registry. And she had three years from then to beginning of HBP to learn Animagery and get registered. To me, she didn't learn it during HBP, not when she can't even do her Metamorphmagus thing, but she has the rest of her life after HBP to learn it. La Gatta Lucianese wrote in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/146180 : << On a subject that comes up in the HPL: How long does Lupin remain a werewolf each month? I should think it would only be for, at most, a 245-hour period, when the moon is actually full. Could it possibly be only during the night of the full moon, or even from moonrise to moonset/daybreak, whichever comes first? >> By some definitions, the moon is full for three nights. By another, it is full for only an instant. I tend to think of werewolves transforming at nightfall (sunset? full darkness?) and transforming back at sunrise, so he could transform for three nights and be humaniform during the days. That doesn't go along with what JKR said about werewolves transforming at moonrise, but neither sunset nor moonrise goes along with PoA and transforming when the moon came out from behind the clouds. Suppose they transform for 12, 24, 36, 72, whatever, call it x, hours 'at' Full Moon, does it start at the instant that the moon is full(est) or does it start x/2 hours before that instant so that the instant is in the middle? SSSusan wrote in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/146245 : << it was mostly his CRASSNESS and CRUELTY in saying "Well - second - Diggory was the f[irst]." Oooooh!! In my opinion, in that moment, that action of Draco's meant that he deserved to be come down upon. >> As everyone is agreed that that was Draco gloating over Cedric's death, I suppose that is what JKR intended. However, it's not what I read -- I read it as Draco correcting his statement for accuracy, which was stupid thing to do under the circumstances. I mean, *besides* it being stupid to shout rejoicing about the Dark Lord having returned when LV's return is supposed (by LV) to be kept secret from the Ministry and the wizarding public, and the Malfoys' allegiance to him is supposed (by Lucius) to be kept secret from the same gudgeons, it's stupid to shout out dramatic and frightening threats and then step on your own lines with clumsy corrections of fact. It's sort of like the famous Monty Python Spanish Inquisition sketch -- let me quote from Wikipedia: "This Inquisition has a hard time starting to inquisit, as they get bogged down in recitations of their chief weapons, among which are fear, surprise, ruthless efficiency, an almost fanatical devotion to the Pope, and nice red uniforms." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spanish_Inquisition_%28Monty_Python%29 Luckdragon wrote in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/146279 : << Why do the pureblood community, who have wizarding geneology at their fingertips, not know that LV himself is not a pureblood >> They don't know that Voldemort is Tom Riddle, so they can't look up his pedigree. Maybe they assume that he's a pureblood from a distant country or a long-ago century. << So how is it that all of his followers and affiliates do not realize that LV is out for himself alone and really has none of their interests at heart. How is it that they blindly follow someone who goes against his own philosophy by accepting these other creatures into his fold. >> Bellatrix and Barty are too fanatically devoted to him to be swayed by mere facts. The other Death Eaters are out for their own goals, which they think Voldemort will help them achieve. I think that some simply want the opportunity to kill, torture, and rape (as their idea of fun) without getting caught and punished, and Voldemort *did* help them achieve that. Some want money, and LV's organization supplied various ways of getting it, from robbing the houses of people they killed, to putting their business customers under Imperius and ordering them to triple their orders. Some may have hoped that LV would share his immortality spells with loyal followers. Lucius in particular, under the delusion that he had Voldemort wrapped around his little finger, expected to be the real dictator of wizarding Britain when Voldemort seized power and did whatever Lucius flatteringly suggested to him to do. Carol wrote in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/146468 : << I think that spy!Peter (snip) was operating very much in the background, not as a DE himself and not known to the DEs because he was giving his information directly to Voldemort (who trusts no one and operates in secrecy). >> That would make sense, to keep one's spy's identity a secret. It permits the possibility that Snape didn't know who the spy/traitor was, believed the general opinion that it was Sirius, and thus was not planning to feed a man he knew to be innocent to the Dementors (not even via Fudge). However, it seems quite impossible that any DE, even Snape, could have believed the wilder claims that Sirius was LV's second in command -- how can a second in command be kept secret from the people he is commanding? BUT, per Sirius, and I think JKR meant us to take it as fact, the Death Eaters in Azkaban were crying out against Pettigrew as the traitor who led LV to his defeat, apparently an ambush. How could the DEs in Azkaban have known that Pettigrew was the faithless Secret Keeper and Snape, also a DE, didn't know it? From juli17 at aol.com Mon Jan 16 03:42:38 2006 From: juli17 at aol.com (juli17 at aol.com) Date: Sun, 15 Jan 2006 22:42:38 EST Subject: Patronus characteristics (was Re: Cheating) Message-ID: <23b.542133b.30fc702e@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 146526 Ceridwen wrote: The nagging problem for me in a Patronus being sent is, Dumbledore is shut up in a tomb. If he's sending a Patronus, and he's alive in there, it stirs all the ancient fears of being buried alive. Of course, with Dumbledore, there will always be some out, some secret passage or some way for him to not be stuck in there with life draining away (can one Apparate from inside a sealed tomb?). It is a curious thing, and it was mentioned for a reason, either to give a more mystical send-off for DD, or to set something up for book 7. I don't think this has been discussed very much. At least I haven't seen much mention. Julie: I think it was mentioned for a reason also, and I also think it will set up something in Book 7. We don't yet know everything about how patronuses work. So do we know that Dumbledore couldn't have arranged to send/release his patronus at some point after his death? (I am one who firmly believes Dumbledore is truly dead.) Speaking of how patronuses work, we just found out in HBP that a wizard can change his/her patronus, when Snape commented on Tonks' changed patronus. I think this fact was also included for a reason, one which will be revealed in Book 7. If we put these two separate facts together--that a wizard can change his patronus, and that a phoenix (which happens to be Dumbledore's patronus) appeared to fly away from Dumbledore's funeral, then we can speculate that perhaps Dumbledore released/sent his patronus (in essence, *willed* his patronus) to someone else. If that is what we see happening at the funeral, the most likely recipient would be Snape. One other real possiblity is Abelforth, but Snape as the recipient is much more dramatic and fitting--if he's DDM of course--and explains JKR's refusal to name Snape's patronus because "it would reveal too much." It would also provide a way for Snape to communicate with Harry in Book 7 without revealing his true identity. I know there are logistics problems to be addressed, like why Harry would trust a patronus he didn't recognize, even if it was a phoenix. (one guess: Dumbledore's portrait might tell Harry he sent his patronus to a close ally, and that Harry should trust any information from that patronus.) And again, we don't know everything about patronuses, so there is room to speculate freely ;-) Julie [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Mon Jan 16 04:09:38 2006 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2006 04:09:38 -0000 Subject: Snape tidbits (Was: Carol/Carol again) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146527 Carol earlier: > << As we see at the Yule Ball, he takes ten points each from Ravenclaw and Hufflepuff for rule breaking (Miss Fawcett and a boy whose name I can't remember making out in the rosebushes) >> > Catlady: > I don't recall it being made clear to me that there was a rule against making out in the rosebushes (or elsewhere). I got the impression that Snape was blasting rosebushes and took points from those of the fleeing students whom he could identify in the dark simply out of Snapish spite. Carol again: I'm not sure about the rules, but I think we can make a fair guess at what Miss Fawcett and her male friend were doing. If they wanted to dance, they'd be at the ball. If they wanted to talk, they could sit at a table, where it was warmer. They wouldn't need to hide in the rosebushes. And the narrator notes that Fleur Delacour and Roger Davies, also hiding in the rosebushes, "looked pretty busy to Harry." I think Snape is prowling the rosebushes to catch kissing couples. It hadn't occurred to me that he was inventing a new rule. At least he didn't give them detention! My point was simply that we do see him taking points from students from a house other than Gryffindor on this occasion, and he treats Ravenclaw and Hufflepuff equally. With equal unfairness, if you like, but it's still equal. Wonder what he would have done with Fleur and Roger. Deducted double points for him since he couldn't deduct them from Fleur? Carol earlier: > << I think that spy!Peter (snip) was operating very much in the > background, not as a DE himself and not known to the DEs because he > was giving his information directly to Voldemort (who trusts no one > and operates in secrecy). >> > Catlady: > That would make sense, to keep one's spy's identity a secret. It permits the possibility that Snape didn't know who the spy/traitor was, believed the general opinion that it was Sirius, and thus was not planning to feed a man he knew to be innocent to the Dementors (not even via Fudge). However, it seems quite impossible that any DE, even Snape, could have believed the wilder claims that Sirius was LV's second in command -- how can a second in command be kept secret from the people he is commanding? Carol: I'm glad you agree that it makes sense to keep the spy's identity secret and that Snape wouldn't know it for that reason. As for believing the wilder claims about Sirius being LV's second in command, he would have known that the spy, whoever he was, was no such thing, that the Daily Prophet was just exaggerating the truth as usual. But he could easily believe that Sirius Black was a murderer; he had his own experience with the Prank, to begin with, and the slashed painting and bedcurtains as further evidence that Black was a homicidal maniac. > > BUT, per Sirius, and I think JKR meant us to take it as fact, the Death Eaters in Azkaban were crying out against Pettigrew as the traitor who led LV to his defeat, apparently an ambush. How could the DEs in Azkaban have known that Pettigrew was the faithless Secret > Keeper and Snape, also a DE, didn't know it? Carol: Black also states that many of the prisoners went mad or died quickly. I think that among the few he didn't were Bellatrix Black and her followers, the Lestrange brothers--the only DEs, not counting young Barty Jr., who believed that Voldemort wasn't dead or permanently vanquished. So I think it was those three that Sirius Black overheard. He says he saw them come in, so quite possibly their cells were near his. Bellatrix starts to tell Snape in HBP that "in the past, [Voldemort] entrusted me with his most precious--" and then she breaks off. His secrets? His precious possessions? Maybe, as I speculated earlier, Bellatrix knew about the locket Horcrux. And if she knew about that, she may also have known the identity of the spy/Secret Keeper who betrayed the Potters. Only she would think that he was only pretending to betray the Potters and in fact knew what would happen to Voldemort. Snape, OTOH, was at Hogwarts when the Potters chose their Secret Keeper. He may have been told by Dumbledore that the Potters intended to make Black their Secret Keeper--he would readily believe the worst about Black--but he couldn't have been told by Voldemort or the Death Eaters. I think only those few Death Eaters knew the identity of the spy/Secret Keeper, and probably they, too, stopped talking about it (except for screaming it out in their nightmares) after a few weeks or months in the company of the Dementors. Carol, who loved your Monty Python quote but thought a gudgeon was a fish From willsonkmom at msn.com Mon Jan 16 04:46:14 2006 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2006 04:46:14 -0000 Subject: Birthday Lists / Re: Who dies in 7? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146528 > Alla: > > Out of curiosity - why were you more concerned with those characters > who are on the list? Do you mean simply because you care about the > characters on the list more than about those who are absent, because > those who are absent ( and alive at the moment) are IMO secondary > characters? Potioncat: When JKR's site opened and she began to wish happy birthdays to certain characters, the idea was suggested that the ones who received greetings were either 1)good guys or 2)still alive after book 7. So there were certain characters I hoped to see. (Even though we have no real way of knowing how a character earns a greeting.) It's been over a year, so everyone ought to be on it. If there is meaning to getting a greeting there could be meaning to not getting one. 1)not important enough, 2)a baddie 3)will not survive book 7. I've not looked to see who is missing. And in this case, the issue isn't, do we know the birthday, but rather, did the person get a greeting? Why does this whole idea give me the urge to chew some Droobles Best Blowing Gum? From nkafkafi at yahoo.com Mon Jan 16 06:00:42 2006 From: nkafkafi at yahoo.com (nkafkafi) Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2006 06:00:42 -0000 Subject: Birthday Lists / Re: Who dies in 7? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146529 > Potioncat: > When JKR's site opened and she began to wish happy birthdays to > certain characters, the idea was suggested that the ones who received > greetings were either 1)good guys or 2)still alive after book 7. So > there were certain characters I hoped to see. (Even though we have no > real way of knowing how a character earns a greeting.) It's been over > a year, so everyone ought to be on it. If there is meaning to getting > a greeting there could be meaning to not getting one. 1)not important > enough, 2)a baddie 3)will not survive book 7. > > I've not looked to see who is missing. And in this case, the issue > isn't, do we know the birthday, but rather, did the person get a > greeting? > > Why does this whole idea give me the urge to chew some Droobles Best > Blowing Gum? > Neri: Dunno, was that a trick question? But just to prove I'm useful, I went to: http://www.hp-lexicon.org/about/sources/jkr.com/jkr-com.html#Timeline and ran a search for the word "birthday". These are the characters that got birthday greetings in JKR's site: Neville, Harry, Ginny, Percy, Hermione, McGonagall, Flitwick, Molly, Bill, Hagrid, Charlie, Snape, Arthur, Ron, Lupin, Fred and George, Sprout, Draco, Dobby. (every one from Neville to Snape also came up the second time). If these are the good guys then both Snape and Lupin are good, but does this mean DD is ESE? The theory that these are the characters left alive in the end seems slightly more fitting. That would mean that no Weasley is going to buy it. However, Luna seems to be in real danger. I know some members who wouldn't grieve. Or maybe the guys that run JKR's site asked her for a list of birthdays, and she sent them one but forgot DD and Luna? Neri From finwitch at yahoo.com Mon Jan 16 07:10:51 2006 From: finwitch at yahoo.com (finwitch) Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2006 07:10:51 -0000 Subject: Dumbledor In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146530 > > Andie: > According to Fantastic Beasts, a Phoenix nests on mountain peaks & is found in Egypt, India, & China. Finwitch: EGYPT. I wonder -- Bill worked there, you know. Did he ever climb onto a mountain? Though I don't recall any mountains in Egypt -- maybe on top of a pyramid? Did Bill ever got harmed by a curse he attempted to break and got healed by an Egyptian Phoenix? Also - remember how they said Dumbledore would know a way to heal Bill's wounds? I'm sure that way was Fawkes' tears... Finwitch From juli17 at aol.com Mon Jan 16 07:17:53 2006 From: juli17 at aol.com (juli17 at aol.com) Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2006 02:17:53 EST Subject: Harry's brand of magic Message-ID: <284.3fd855a.30fca2a1@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 146531 Nicholas wrote: The challenge for Harry is not to learn more magic, but to conquer his emotions and to channel the instinctive powers that he possesses. In the confrontation with Snape at the end of HBP, Harry's magic was useless, because he was so overcome with emotion at what had happened to Dumbledore. His efforts were slow and predictable, and Snape easily defended himself (whilst at the same time, and very interestingly, telling Harry exactly where he was going wrong and why the spells he was casting were ineffective!) Julie: I very much agree with your point that Harry possesses instinctive power, which he must learn to channel. I also think Harry's magic was useless against Snape not because he was overcome by emotion in general but because of the particular emotions that were directing him at the moment--hatred and a desire for vengeance. Dumbledore has said Harry's greatest power is his capacity for love, which is apparently the power Voldemort knows not, and certainly doesn't understand. So until Harry channels his considerable instinctive powers through love and mercy (Dumbledore's method) instead of through hatred and vengeance, he cannot defeat Voldemort (just as Snape, despite his prowess with magic, does not have the power that will defeat Voldemort). Julie [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From finwitch at yahoo.com Mon Jan 16 07:37:41 2006 From: finwitch at yahoo.com (finwitch) Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2006 07:37:41 -0000 Subject: "Blood" vs. genetics in the HP books (Was: Magic genetics) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146532 Carol: > At any rate, setting aside JKR's rather muddled idea of genetics, we > never hear the terms "gene" or "genetics" spoken by any wizard, not > even Dumbledore. It's always "blood." Finwitch: How about combining both? I mean like the heritance of blood-type. The blood-type has *two* dominant allels: A and B; one recessive, 0. In addition there's the Rhesus-factor (and some others, but...). A-type occurs as AA and A0 (which is what *dominant* gene means!) and evenly, B-type occurs as BB and B0. Being recessive, type 0 only occurs as 00. There's also type AB - meaning one parent has A and the other has B. Rhesus-factor is dominant. As for how this applies to magic - well, maybe if the types A and B have magical form, it would explain the occasional squib (0-type). And I suppose that exhange between Magical A and Muggle A is a small one. Also, if a mutation happens in reprocuctive cells, it would affect offspring, but not the parent - if elsewhere, it affects the parent if it happens in a cell where the gene functions... Finwitch From gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk Mon Jan 16 07:45:37 2006 From: gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk (Geoff Bannister) Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2006 07:45:37 -0000 Subject: Harry Vanquishing LV without killing him. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146533 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "a_svirn" wrote: > > > Geoff: > > I see it as the other way round - the prophecy appeared to Macbeth > to > > be a literal one and hence could not be fulfilled but the outcome > was > > a metaphorical interpretation of what the witches prophesied. > > a_svirn: > I guess it depends on how we understand *metaphorical*. When I say > that Macbeth interpreted "no man of woman born" and "until //Great > Birnam Wood, to high Dunsinane Hill" metaphorically I mean that he > saw these phrases as nothing more than figures of speech meaning *no > one* and *never*. And that's what metaphor is ? a figure of speech. > As it turned out, however, the meaning was literal and not at all > figurative. Geoff: It's not the meaning of metaphorical - I think we agree on that. It's the outcome that is the item under discussion in the same way that it is the actual and possible outcomes of Trelawney's various prophecies which have been under scrutiny on the group. I accept that Caesarean section can be considered to be "not of woman born" but **no way** did Birnam wood come to Dunsinane. I might just as well pick up a branch in my local wood and claim that I am a tree - which I'm not! So, as I said previously, I see the *outcomes* of the Shakespeare prophecies as diametrically opposed. Thus, I think that we could see a whole swathe of possible interpretations for that confounded prophecy covering Harry and Voldemort. From hickengruendler at yahoo.de Mon Jan 16 08:29:03 2006 From: hickengruendler at yahoo.de (hickengruendler) Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2006 08:29:03 -0000 Subject: Birthday Lists / Re: Who dies in 7? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146534 > > > > Neri: > > Neville, Harry, Ginny, Percy, Hermione, McGonagall, Flitwick, Molly, > Bill, Hagrid, Charlie, Snape, Arthur, Ron, Lupin, Fred and George, > Sprout, Draco, Dobby. > > (every one from Neville to Snape also came up the second time). > > If these are the good guys then both Snape and Lupin are good, but > does this mean DD is ESE? > > The theory that these are the characters left alive in the end seems > slightly more fitting. Hickengruendler: Or it is a mixture of both. The good (or at least not totally evil) guys, who are still alive in the end. I think the theory that only the most important ones get a greeting is problematic, since this doesn't explain Flitwick and Sprout or even Charlie and Bill. Even though they are the Heads of Ravenclaw and Hufflepuff or Weasleys, neither of them is very important as a character. I am sure the reason Dumbledore or Sirius did not appear there is because they are dead, and it would be slightly morbid to wish a dead character a Happy Birthday. On the other hand, I'm not sure that this means, that the others will survive. Maybe JKR did not wish those a Happy Birthday, whose death she already wrote. I will look out if one of the characters on the list suddenly disappears during the next year, because IMO that would be a pretty good sign that she wrote their deaths. But I also think that the reason some of the characters do not get a birthday wish is because they are too evil. Happy Birthday Dolores Umbridge or Happy Birthday Lucius Malfoy would be slightly odd, even if they survive. Hickengruendler From DaveH47 at mindspring.com Mon Jan 16 08:30:51 2006 From: DaveH47 at mindspring.com (Dave Hardenbrook) Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2006 00:30:51 -0800 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Birthday Lists / Re: Who dies in 7? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <647841242.20060116003051@mindspring.com> No: HPFGUIDX 146535 Sunday, January 15, 2006, 10:00:42 PM, nkafkafi wrote: n> The theory that these are the characters left alive in the end seems n> slightly more fitting. Though it might mean that it omits those currently *known* to be dead (e.g. Dumbledore and Sirius), or those who are "presently" (between books 6 & 7) dead... Has Jo ever confirmed the accuracy of the Lexicon timeline (in spite of the anachronisms)? n> That would mean that no Weasley is going to buy n> it. However, Luna seems to be in real danger. I know some members who n> wouldn't grieve. Also distressingly (to me) conspicuous by their absence are Tonks and Fleur... Are Bill and Remus to be bereaved lovers??? -- Dave From bboyminn at yahoo.com Mon Jan 16 08:44:16 2006 From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2006 08:44:16 -0000 Subject: Harry Vanquishing LV without killing him. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146536 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Geoff Bannister" wrote: > > Geoff: > ...edited... > > I accept that Caesarean section can be considered to be "not of > woman born" but **no way** did Birnam wood come to Dunsinane. > I might just as well pick up a branch in my local wood and claim > that I am a tree - which I'm not! ... > bboyminn: Actually, Birnam Wood did literally come to Dunsinane Hill. Here in the midwest of the USA, we don't refer to a stand of trees as 'a wood' we call it 'a woods' as in my brother and I went walking in the woods. Wood is a bunch of sawed up boards harvested from trees. Now I'm only maginally knowledgable with the story of MacBeth, but I'm pretty sure in the story 'wood' from the forest of Birnam did make an appearance at Dunsinane Hill. Back to Harry, I think the point that is trying to be made here is that prophecies are not always what they seem. It seems impossible that the forest at Birnam could ever come to Dunsinane Hill. Trees don't march, they don't move, but wood from those trees can move. Now we have to find some alternative interpretations of Trelawny's prophecy about Harry and the Dark Lord. First, it doesn't mention Voldemort by name. Some have interpreted 'the Dark Lord' as Snape; Snape kills Voldemort, tries to take over as the /next/ Dark Lord, and Harry kills Snape. I don't believe that, but can we actually say that the Prophecy rules it out? 'Either must die at the hand of the other', but 'either' and 'other' are only assumed. We jump to the obvious and logical choice, but like the witches prophecy of MacBeth, the obvious isn't always correct. Maybe 'either' means either Harry or Neville must die at the hand of the 'other' meaning Voldemort, or that Voldemort must die at the hand of either Harry or Neville. Maybe 'neither can live while the other survives' means that Harry and Voldemort can't live while Neville survives. Again, I don't believe that, but can we say with absolute certainty that the Prophecy does NOT say that? So, the point is that the obvious and logical interpretation of MacBeth's prophecy is indeed *no one* and *never*, but the reality, as observed after the fact, is that these obvious assumptions have very unobvious loopholes. Now the question is can we find similar unobvious be yet reasonable loopholes in Trelawny's Prophecy? I think there have certainly been many alternative interpretations of the wording of the Prophecy; I've given some examples. However, I'm not sure how reasonable or likely any of these alternate interpretations are. Though I admit I'm open to any alternative interpretations, reasonable or otherwise, that people might like to speculate. Just passing it along. Steve/bboyminn From maria8162001 at yahoo.com Sun Jan 15 17:49:49 2006 From: maria8162001 at yahoo.com (Maria Vaerewijck) Date: Sun, 15 Jan 2006 09:49:49 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Merlin-DD (wasRe: Cheating In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20060115174950.12282.qmail@web53207.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 146537 Potioncat: The main reason I think DD is dead, dead as we know it, is that I don't think JKR would kill someone in one book and have all the kiddies and adults wait years before finding out he's alive. If she was going to do that, I think she would have completed it in one book. Of course, Black didn't think DD would hire anyone who had ever worked for LV. So, who knows. I read the chapter titles before starting the book. Boy, was that misleading! As soon as I saw a chapter about a cave, I knew DD was going just like Merlin...only the cave didn't exactly work out that way. The most recent Merlin story I've read was by Mary Stewart. In her version Merlin is put in the cave, but is not really dead. He does come back to advise Arthur, but keeps an otherwise low profile. I haven't had the time to see if the older versions include Merlin's return or not. All the strange things around the funeral seem to point that way. But I wouldn't hold my breath. maria8162001: We have to remember also that Dumbledore can make himself invisible without the invisibility cloak. They cannot actually see the body as it says in HBP, " Bright, white flames had erupted around Dumbledore's body and the table upon which it lay: higher and higher they rose, obscuring the body." What if during that time he made himself invisible. There's also this thing that I found in the HP lexicon that Dumbledore can cast spell without wand. That will surely is something to think about too, when Harry was freed from the freezing charm Dumbledore cast on him. So even without a wand he could have unfreeze with non verbal spell before he fell off the tower. Just a thought, still can't get over Dumbledore's death. I need to re-read all the HP books again to see where DD cast a spell without wand. maria8162001 Before posting to any list, you MUST read the group's Admin File! http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/files/Admin_Files/HBF_Text__MUST_READ Please use accurate subject headings and snip unnecessary material from posts to which you're replying! SPONSORED LINKS Half-blood prince Adult education Culture club Organizational culture --------------------------------- YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS Visit your group "HPforGrownups" on the web. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: HPforGrownups-unsubscribe at yahoogroups.com Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. --------------------------------- --------------------------------- Yahoo! Photos Got holiday prints? See all the ways to get quality prints in your hands ASAP. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From brahadambal at indiatimes.com Mon Jan 16 05:27:56 2006 From: brahadambal at indiatimes.com (latha279) Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2006 05:27:56 -0000 Subject: Keys to future??? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146538 Hi people, There was this one thing that I noticed recently. In JKR's site, the fan-sites key leads to a window where a lot of trophies are displayed along with the ones for the fan-sites she likes. these (on the top row) have names of people who are seriously injured (Frank Longbottom) or those that are dead (James and Sirius) and also Tom Riddle. (I personally consider Tom Riddle dead, too; although LV is alive). The bottom row's trophies are not fully seen. Now my question is, the middle row shows names like - Percy Weasley, ___Evans and Bellatrix!!! What does that mean? who is ___ Evans?? if Lily, why? and why are Percy's and Bella's names there? Does it indicate that they will be killed in the next book? Just querying - Brady. From a_svirn at yahoo.com Mon Jan 16 10:57:19 2006 From: a_svirn at yahoo.com (a_svirn) Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2006 10:57:19 -0000 Subject: Harry Vanquishing LV without killing him. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146539 > Geoff: > > I accept that Caesarean section can be considered to be "not of woman > born" but **no way** did Birnam wood come to Dunsinane. I might just > as well pick up a branch in my local wood and claim that I am a tree - > which I'm not! So, as I said previously, I see the *outcomes* of the > Shakespeare prophecies as diametrically opposed. a_svirn: Yes, I see your point, though I can't say I agree that the difference is that huge. In both cases Shakespeare is punning and quibbling with different (and literal) meanings of the word. Certainly Birnam Wood cannot march up the hill, but it's not like caesarean children are born of she-wolves. The distinction between "born of" and "ripped from" can only be described as petty or trivial, just like the punning on *wood* as `trees' and *wood* as `material, wood cut from trees' sounds a bit awkward. (Not that Macbeth noticed the pun. He took it as literally as possible ? he was told that Birnam Wood came to Dunsisnane and believed it without question even as he railed at the messenger and called him names.) >Thus, I think that > we could see a whole swathe of possible interpretations for that > confounded prophecy covering Harry and Voldemort. > a_svirn: That's true. When I said that the meaning of the prophesy will probably be quite literal I meant that what Dumbledore interpreted as a figure of speech "die at the hand of another" (a trop) may turn out to be just another quibble. From gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk Mon Jan 16 11:16:10 2006 From: gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk (Geoff Bannister) Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2006 11:16:10 -0000 Subject: Harry Vanquishing LV without killing him. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146540 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Steve" wrote: > > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Geoff Bannister" > wrote: > > > > Geoff: > > ...edited... > > > > I accept that Caesarean section can be considered to be "not of > > woman born" but **no way** did Birnam wood come to Dunsinane. > > I might just as well pick up a branch in my local wood and claim > > that I am a tree - which I'm not! ... > > > > bboyminn: > > Actually, Birnam Wood did literally come to Dunsinane Hill. Here in > the midwest of the USA, we don't refer to a stand of trees as 'a wood' > we call it 'a woods' as in my brother and I went walking in the woods. > Wood is a bunch of sawed up boards harvested from trees. Now I'm only > maginally knowledgable with the story of MacBeth, but I'm pretty sure > in the story 'wood' from the forest of Birnam did make an appearance > at Dunsinane Hill. Geoff: I must disagree here. In English, the usage is slightly different. I agree that I often take my dogs for about 5 miles a day walking "in the woods" but Wood and Woods are both used to designate specific areas. Within a couple of miles or so or where I live, there is Horner Wood, Stoke Wood, Wilmersham Wood, Worthy Wood and so on; sometimes, these join up with each other but the term Woods is usually applied to a more extensive area, such as Selworthy Woods, Bossington Woods. Shakespeare is quite specific with indicating that Birnam Wood is a place and that the prophecy of the wood moving is (apparently) happening: Act V, Scene 4 SIWARD: What wood is this before us? MENTIETH: The wood of Birnam. Act V, Scene 5 MACBETH: ...Thou comest to use thy tongue: thy story quickly. MESSENGER: Gracious my lord, I should report that which I say I saw, But know not how to do it. MACBETH: Well, say sir. MESSENGER: As I did stand my watch upon the hill I look'd toward Birnam, and anon methought The Wood began to move. We already know that the witches' intent is to bring Macbeth down and are using prophecies which can be, and are, misinterpreted. Is there a power at work trying to mislead Voldemort? I shall have to spend a lttle longer considering post again when I have more time. From willsonkmom at msn.com Mon Jan 16 12:58:14 2006 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2006 12:58:14 -0000 Subject: Birthday Lists / Re: Who dies in 7? In-Reply-To: <647841242.20060116003051@mindspring.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146541 > Though it might mean that it omits those currently *known* to be dead > (e.g. Dumbledore and Sirius), or those who are "presently" (between > books 6 & 7) dead... Has Jo ever confirmed the accuracy of the Lexicon > timeline (in spite of the anachronisms)? Potioncat: Well, DD didn't get a greeting during the first round, even though to us, he was still alive. Some Potter-sites will send off a happy birthday greeting along the lines of "Happy (age here) birthday" as if the character had aged up into our present. Is JKR doing the same thing? We are a strange bunch, aren't we? From kelleyaynn at yahoo.com Mon Jan 16 13:48:35 2006 From: kelleyaynn at yahoo.com (kelleyaynn) Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2006 13:48:35 -0000 Subject: "Blood" vs. genetics in the HP books (Was: Magic genetics) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146542 > Finwitch: > > How about combining both? I mean like the heritance of blood-type. The > blood-type has *two* dominant allels: A and B; one recessive, 0. In > addition there's the Rhesus-factor (and some others, but...). > > As for how this applies to magic - well, maybe if the types A and B > have magical form, it would explain the occasional squib (0-type). And > I suppose that exhange between Magical A and Muggle A is a small one. > Kelleyaynn: But since both alleles for blood type (A and B) are dominant, they are expressed. So magic can't be a form of codominant alleles, since any muggle that had a dominant magic alleles would not be a muggle, but would be magical. Squibs are most easily explained genetically by the interference of a second gene, or perhaps a mutation in the promoter region of the magic gene, or some other reason that doesn't have to do directly with the magic gene (some other problem that interferes with the ability to do magic, kind of like a learning disability). Finwitch: > Also, if a mutation happens in reprocuctive cells, it would affect > offspring, but not the parent - if elsewhere, it affects the parent if > it happens in a cell where the gene functions... Kelleyaynn: Mutations occuring in any specific location in a genome are extremely rare (though mutations overall are not). So explaining magical children from muggles or squibs from magical parents by virtue of mutations in the germ line cells (the reproductive cells that give rise to eggs and sperm) is not really valid. They are too common to have happened that way, at least most of the time. I've said before that genetics is much more complicated than simple Mendelian rules. All the permutations of magical and non-magical people cannot be explained simply via Mendelian genetics. Kelleyaynn From katmac at katmac.cncdsl.com Mon Jan 16 14:38:06 2006 From: katmac at katmac.cncdsl.com (lagattalucianese) Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2006 14:38:06 -0000 Subject: Harry Vanquishing LV without killing him. In-Reply-To: <20060113033755.83367.qmail@web53301.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146543 > > Luckdragon: > ...The dark lord will exist no more, but the shell of what he > once was(Tom Riddle) may remain to live out his days a powerless, > souless man. > La Gatta Lucianese: I like this. JKR has already foreshadowed the kind of existence a soulless creature has, in the Death Eaters who have been kissed by a dementor. Perhaps that will ultimately be Voldemort's fate--with all his horcruxes destroyed, to have the last bit of soul sucked out of him, so that nothing is left but that hideous pseudo-body he now inhabits. Truly a fate worse than death. From gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk Mon Jan 16 15:15:53 2006 From: gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk (Geoff Bannister) Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2006 15:15:53 -0000 Subject: Parallels in Prophecy (long) Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146544 In the six months which have passed since the unveiling of HBP, a huge amount of time and bandwidth has been expended on certain threads which seem to dominate the thinking of group members, in particular Snape and the Horcruxes. This has been true in the past with other topics and "that" prophecy has frequently occupied the headline position. My mind has been brought back to it because of the brief exchanges I have had recently regarding the prophecies in Shakespeare's "Macbeth" and I have been pondering over other prophecies which come to mind. Even in the real world, this is an area which lays itself open to varied interpretations and misinterpretations. By way of example, the Oracle at Delphi in ancient times was renowned for its obfuscatory messages. In group discussions which involve other books, the most commonly occurring comparisons are with LOTR and the Narnia books and both of these, as well as Macbeth, have prophecies in places. Perhaps the easiest are those on C.S.Lewis' books. In "The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe", two are quoted. Mr.Beaver tells the children: "For that's another of the old rhymes: When Adam's flesh and Adam's bone Sits at Cair Paravel in throne, The evil time will be over and done" Shortly afterwards, he continues: "She (the White Witch) has been watching for you this many a year and if she knew there were four of you she'd be more dangerous still." "What's that to do with it?" asked Peter. "Because of another prophecy," said Mr.Beaver. "Down at Cair Paravel ? that's the castle on the sea coast down at the mouth of this river which ought to be the capital if all was as it should be ? down at Cair Paravel there are four thrones and it's a saying in Narnia time out of mind that when two Sons of Adam and two Daughters of Adam sit in those four thrones, then it will be the end not only of the White Witch's reign but of her life..." These are very straightforward prophecies and would seem to be too obvious for wrong readings to be made; in passing, the second has interesting echoes of Harry Potter to me. Considering Macbeth, the meetings with the witches produce messages which differ in that they are a mixture of fact and foretelling. When they first greet Macbeth, they hail him as Thane of Glamis, Thane of Cawdor and as a future king. The first he knows for fact but, within minutes, he is greeted with the news that the second title is now his because of its previous holder's treason. He is intrigued by the thought of kingship and when he tells Lady Macbeth, she sets about converting it into a self-fulfilling prophecy by arranging the murder of King Duncan. Scotland is thrown into turmoil by the tyrannical rule which follows which leads Macbeth to his second encounter with the Weird Sisters. Again, the advice is split into a warning and two prophecies. First, beware Macduff, the Thane of Fife. Then the two messages we have been discussing: "Be bloody, bold and resolute: Laugh to scorn The power of man: for none of woman born Shall harm Macbeth" And "Macbeth shall never vanquish'd be, until Great Birnam Wood, to high Dunsinane Hill Shall come against him." Finally, we have an interesting parallel in "The Return of the King". The Lord of the Nazg?l is confronted in front of the fallen King Th?oden: "Begone, foul dwimmerlaik, lord of carrion! Leave the dead in peace!" A cold voice answered: "Come not between the Nazg?l and his prey! .." "A sword rang as it was drawn. "Do what you will; but I will hinder it if I may." "Hinder me? Thou fool. No living man may hinder me!" Then Merry heard of all sounds in that hour the strangest. It seemed that Dernhelm laughed and the clear voice was like the ring of steel. "But no living man am I! You look upon a woman. ?owyn I am, ?omund's daughter. You stand between me and my lord and kin. Begone, if you be not deathless! For living or dark undead, I will smite you if you touch him." The winged creature screamed at her but the Ringwraith made no answer and was silent as if in sudden doubt. The interesting thought which comes to me is, where does prophecy originate? In the examples above, we have foretelling from two different directions. The prophecies given to Macbeth are planned to subvert "brave Macbeth" and to bring him down to destruction; they are evil in intent. Conversely, that in Lewis' story is prophecy on the side of good, telling of the fall of the White Witch and the restoration of Narnia. Likewise, the prophecy regarding the Lord of the Nazg?l also can be seen as a good one. Similar in its idea to Macbeth, it has obviously been taken at face value by the Ringwraith, taking "man" in a generic sense and failing, as Macbeth did, to see an alternative interpretation. Now to Harry Potter. Do we consider the prophecy to be a good one or a bad one? Initially, I suppose good because it talks about the Dark Lord being vanquished. Again, rather like the Macbeth scenario, Voldemort makes it a self-fulfilling prophecy by taking action to negate it; he decides that Harry is the "one" meant and attacks him. Reminiscent of Macbeth and King Duncan. Jo Rowling makes no secret of the fact that she likes Macbeth. In the Leaky Cauldron/Mugglenet interview on 16th July 2005, she said this: "JKR: .Harry's a threat. They must meet each other. ES: I remember thinking when I read "Order of the Phoenix," what would happen if Harry and Voldemort just decided to ? JKR: Shake hands, and walk away? We'll agree to disagree! [Laughter.] ES: What if he never heard the prophecy? JKR: And that's it, isn't it. As I said, that's what I posted on my site - ES: I'm glad you put that up. JKR: It's the "Macbeth" idea. I absolutely adore "Macbeth." It is possibly my favourite Shakespeare play. And that's the question isn't it? If Macbeth hadn't met the witches, would he have killed Duncan? Would any of it have happened? Is it fated or did he make it happen? I believe he made it happen." Voldermort, by foloowing a similar line of thinking, has kicked the ball into touch and made things happen. But the question remains, how do we interpret the prophecy? We have seen that, in the case of Shakespeare and Tolkien, the prophecies worked out in a way that their recipients least expected. Foretelling which seemed to favour them was suddenly revealed to have a sting in its tail. It is interesting in the LOTR narrative at the Pelennor Fields that ?owyn is able to overcome the Witch-King because, she is not a man, and she is also helped by Merry, who also is not a man but a hobbit. In the final encounter, the chief Ringwraith is unbodied. But there is no stigma attached to her in the killing of this evil being. It is a pivotal point in the great victory which the Men of the West achieved against Sauron. Can we draw any conclusions for Book 7. Possibly a dozen conflicting resolutions to the battle! Since Jo Rowling is fan of Macbeth and read Tolkien when she was about twenty and enjoyed it, we can see that there are echoes of what enthused her in her use of prophecy etc. Voldermort has perhaps been lulled into thinking that the prophecy favours him; is he, like the Ringwraith and Macbeth, due for a nasty shock? Can Harry dispose of him by unbodying him again ? perhaps with the help of others such as Ron and Hermione acting in concert as Merry did? Can he also, as ?owyn did, defeat Voldemort and still feel no guilt attached? ?owyn's cry: "Begone, if thou be not deathless" still chimes with me. Voldemort prides himself that he had: "gone further than anybody along the path that leads to immortality." (GOF "The Death Eaters" p.566 UK edition) but, like the Lord of the Nazg?l, he hasn't yet reached that point... I take a measure of ease in that, both in the Macbeth and LOTR prophecies, good triumphed in the end; I am still a member of the Harry will Live group and am optimistic that we will prevail. I believe that, in the end, JKR will pull off something which will surprise Voldemort, Harry, the Wizarding World and, last but not least, us... From sherriola at earthlink.net Mon Jan 16 16:19:58 2006 From: sherriola at earthlink.net (Sherry Gomes) Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2006 08:19:58 -0800 Subject: CHAPDISC: HBP8, Snape Victorious Message-ID: <002a01c61ab8$b41be730$0400a8c0@pensive> No: HPFGUIDX 146545 CHAPTER DISCUSSIONS: Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince, Chapter 8, Snape Victorious Summary: The chapter begins with Harry, immobilized and invisible, under his own invisibility cloak. He hopes someone will come looking for him, realizing all the same that even if someone looks in, they will not see him, so he hopes someone will come in and step on him. As he lies there, he hates Malfoy. He begins to worry as he hears the sounds of the last people and luggage leaving the train. His only hope is that his friends will notice his absence, but this won't happen till the feast, and by then the train will be on its way back to London. Failing in his attempts to speak, he remembers that some wizards can perform nonverbal magic, and he tries to summon his wand with no success. He slips further into discouragement. He can hear the sounds of trees rustling, owls hooting, and he wonders, despising himself for it even as he does, if he might just hear panicked voices wondering what had happened to him. He imagines the amusement Malfoy will derive from telling his friends all about what he did to Harry Potter. The train lurches, the engine roars to life, and Harry knows that it is getting ready to go, with him still aboard, and nobody knowing where he is. Suddenly, he feels the cloak fly off him and Tonks greets him with her usual "Wotcher Harry" greeting, and releases him from the immobilizing spell. Tonks tells him to hurry, that they have to jump off the train and he hurries after her. Tonks leaps off the train, and Harry jumps off too, staggering a little as he lands. The train picks up speed and disappears around a corner. Harry is safe. Tonks asks Harry who did this to him, and he tells her it was Draco Malfoy. She doesn't say anything in response and gives him back his cloak. Harry feels angry and embarrassed to have been found in such a ridiculous position. He notices that she is still mousy and miserable looking, just as she was at The Burrow earlier in the summer. Tonks offers to fix his nose. Harry is reluctant, because he is concerned she won't do it right, and he would rather go to Madam Pomfrey whom he trusts. However he lets Tonks do it because he doesn't want to hurt her feelings. She is able to fix his nose actually and he thanks her. Tonks tells him to put his cloak back on, and they begin their walk up to Hogwarts. Tonks sends a large silvery something out of her wand and Harry asks if it is a patronus. She says yes, that she has sent word to the school that she's found him, so they won't worry. Harry asks Tonks how she found him, and she tells him that she knew he hadn't gotten off the train. She also says she knew he had the cloak and wondered if he was hiding. She saw the blinds down in the compartment and went to investigate. Harry asks her why she's there, and she tells him she is stationed in Hogsmeade now to give the school extra protection. She also tells him that Proudfoot, Savage and Dawlish are also posted there, and Harry remembers that Dawlish is the auror Dumbledore attacked, when Fudge tried to have him arrested the previous year. They go on in silence for a while, Harry thinking about the changes in Tonks. Previously, she had been annoyingly nosy, full of jokes, smiling. He wonders if the changes in her are due to the events at the ministry. He supposes he should say something to her, that Hermione would probably tell him to talk to Tonks, consoling her about the death of Sirius. He wonders if she is blaming herself. He thinks she shouldn't blame herself, that it isn't her fault, that his fault is so much more. But still, he cannot bring himself to talk about Sirius to anyone, and he remains silent. After a long walk--Harry hadn't realized how far the station was from the school--at last, they arrive at Hogwarts. Harry feels relieved to be leaving this gloomy Tonks. However, when he tries to open the gates, they will not open. He tries alohomora, but nothing happens, and Tonks tells him that spell won't work on these gates. She tells him that Dumbledore bewitched the gates himself. She also tells him that there are anti-intruder jinxes on the walls, so he could not climb one, and that security has been tightened. Harry feels annoyed and sarcastically tells her that he'll have to sleep outside. She tells him that someone is coming for him and points out someone coming from the castle. Harry feels relieved, thinking that he wouldn't even mind if it was Filch. He removes his cloak, before he recognizes the person coming toward them. He feels instantly full of loathing when he recognizes Snape. Snape begins in his usual way with a sneer and sarcasm about Harry's late arrival and not being in school robes. Harry is instantly on the defensive and tries to explain, but Snape cuts him off. He tells Tonks that she need not wait, that Harry is "quite--ah--safe in my hands." Tonks says that she had meant for Hagrid to get the message and Snape tells her that Hagrid was late. As he shuts and secures the gates, Snape tells Tonks that he was interested to see her new patronus. He goes on to say that he thought the old one was better, and that the new one looks weak. Tonks looks shocked and angry at the mention of her patronus but says nothing more except to respond to Harry's good night and thanks. Harry and Snape begin to walk up to the castle. As Harry and Snape walk up to the castle, Harry is overwhelmed with feelings of hatred for Snape, so strong that he wonders why Snape can't feel them. He has come to blame Snape deeply for the death of Sirius. He believes that Snape's taunting of Sirius in OOTP is partly to blame for Sirius rushing off to the ministry to rescue him, Harry. He also believes that Snape is one person who is not sorry that Sirius is dead, and this makes it easy to blame him for the death. Snape takes a total of 70 points from Gryffindor because of lateness and muggle attire. Harry's rage grows stronger, but he thinks he would rather be immobilized and on the way back on the train, rather than admit to Snape what had happened. Snape goes on chiding him, remarking that Harry probably wanted to make a grand entrance halfway through the meal for dramatic effect. Harry remains silent and seething, and they finish their trip to the castle. Harry wonders if he can slip in under his cloak, but Snape, seeming to read his mind, tells him that he can walk in so that everyone sees him, which is what Snape says is what Harry wanted anyway. Harry walks in, people begin to stare at him. He sees his friends and rushes to them. Ron starts to ask him where he's been and then breaks off to ask what Harry has done to his face. He and everyone around them are goggling at Harry's face. Harry asks what's wrong with it and Hermione tells him that he is covered in blood. She cleans him up and presses him to tell what happened. He tells her to wait, aware that others are listening in. She continues to press him and he tells her not now. He hopes that people will think he was off doing something heroic and that Malfoy's story won't reach too many Gryffindor ears. Harry tries to get some dinner, but just as he reaches for it, the regular food disappears and is replaced with dessert. The trio discusses the sorting hat saying more of the same, and that Dumbledore hadn't mentioned Voldemort yet. Harry mentions that Snape said Hagrid was late. Hermione tells him that Hagrid was only a few minutes late and points out that Hagrid is waving at Harry from the staff table. Harry looks up at Hagrid and as usual notices the other teachers at the table. To his surprise, Trelawney is there. This is very unusual. As he looks away he notices that Malfoy is entertaining the Slytherin table with a dramatization of the events on the train. He feels angry and wishes he could fight Draco one on one. Hermione asks Harry what Slughorn wanted, and he tells them that it was to try to find out what happened at the Ministry. Ron confirms that everyone wants to know that, and if Harry is indeed THE CHOSEN ONE. Nearly Headless Nick joins the conversation, telling them that the ghosts have been questioning him about the matter, because he is considered somewhat of a Potter authority in the spirit community. He says that he tells them he will not repeat anything about Harry, that he would rather die than betray his trust and Ron breaks in to say that it's not saying much, considering NH N is already dead. NHN gets offended and tells Ron that as usual, he has the sensitivity of a blunt axe. Dumbledore begins to give his usual after dinner speech. The students notice his hand and begin to murmur about it. He realizes this and brushes it off with a brief "nothing to worry about" and goes on. As he gives the typical greeting, Harry tells his friends that the hand was like that when he'd seen Dumbledore over the summer. Hermione comments that the hand looks as if it is dead. She says that there are some old curses and poisons that can't be undone. Dumbledore goes on with his speech. He says that there is a blanket ban on all products from Weasleys Wizarding Wheezes from Filch, and tells people who are interested in playing Quidditch or commentating to get in touch with their heads of house. And then he moves to the part where he introduces the new staff members. Dumbledore drops a bombshell as he introduces Slughorn as the new potions master. JKR wrote this exquisitely, with a little delay, building suspense. Shock ripples around the dining hall, and everyone is repeating the word, potions? Then Dumbledore goes on to say that Snape will be taking over the Defense against the Dark Arts position. Harry is incensed at this idea. He thinks about the general knowledge around the school that Dumbledore has not given the position to Snape, who has wanted it for years, because Dumbledore did not trust Snape. Harry's friends take him to task for telling them that Slughorn was for DADA, and he realizes that Dumbledore had never said the name of the subject Slughorn would be teaching. Snape does not stand, but raises a lazy hand to the Slytherins, and Harry believes he detects a look of triumph on Snape's face. He tells his friends that at least this means that Snape will be gone by the end of the year. When Ron questions him, Harry mentions the job being jinxed and Quirrel's death. He says that he is keeping his fingers crossed for another death. Hermione reproaches him strongly for this statement. Dumbledore goes on to discuss Voldemort's return and the dangerous times they are in. He tells them of increased security and admonishes the students to follow all security measures. He specifically mentions not wandering around after bedtime. Then he tells them to go off to bed. Harry and Ron wait till everyone else is moving out of the hall before they leave. Ron asks Harry what really happened to his nose, and Harry explains. Harry considers it a mark of Ron's true friendship that he does not laugh about it. As Harry and Ron are discussing things, Hagrid overhears and chides Harry for using Voldemort's name. Harry tells him that Dumbledore uses it, and Hagrid says, well, that's Dumbledore, as if nobody else should dare say the name. They have some conversation about Grawp and Hagrid tells the boys he'll see them at his class. He mentions Buckbeak, now Witherwings. Ron and Harry are appalled at the thought that Hagrid is expecting them to be in his class. None of them is continuing with care of magical creatures. The chapter ends with Harry worrying about what Hagrid will think. Discussion questions 1. This is the first mention of nonverbal spells in the book, though it becomes important later as we know. Did it catch you at all at this point, or did you just pass over it as you wondered how he'd get out of this pickle? 2. Harry despises himself for wishing there would be the sound of panic, people wondering what had happened to him. He has always hated his celebrity, but in this situation, it might have helped. Later in the chapter, when he is at the Gryffindor table and feeling embarrassed, he hopes the students will just assume he was off doing something heroic. How do you feel about his thoughts in this situation? Does it seem inconsistent, practical, or natural to you? 3. Here we see Tonks jump off a moving train. All through the last book, OOTP, we are shown how clumsy Tonks is. She constantly breaks things or trips over things. It becomes comic relief throughout that book. But here we see her casually leaping off a moving train. What did you think of this? We learn later that Tonks has lost her metamorphmagus ability. Do you think her ability to change her appearance could be part of why she is clumsy? Is it possible that she isn't very well coordinated because of her metamorphing? Will she be clumsy again now that she has her ability back at the end of HBP? Or is there something more sinister going on here? Is this really Tonks? 4. Some have said that we didn't see enough of Harry grieving for Sirius. What do you think of this scene, with Harry's thoughts about Tonks and his inability to talk to her about Sirius? Does this show his grief to you? 5. I just noticed this when working on this chapter and actually reading it in braille instead of hearing audio where I can't tell how a sentence is punctuated. Snape tells Tonks that Harry is "quite--ah--safe in my hands." Is there any implication in his words here, or is it just done for emphasis, to add some sharpness, for Harry's benefit? Or for Tonks? Just curious about how this was written. Any thoughts? 6. Later in HBP, we learn that Tonks' patronus is now a wolf, and we're led to suspect it has changed because of her love for Remus. But here at this point, we don't know any of that yet. Why do you think Snape made these comments about her patronus? He hasn't seemed to have any particular feelings one way or the other about Tonks previously; in fact, did we ever see them interact before? Why does he say that her patronus is weak? What do you think about the whole significance of the changing patronus? Does it foreshadow events yet to come, or are there implications about Lupin in Snape's comments? 7. We've discussed Harry's hatred of Snape over Sirius death many times in the past, and I want to go in a different direction with this question. Harry believes that the reason Sirius rushed off to the ministry was because of Snape's taunts. Whatever you think of that belief, why do you think Harry would so easily believe that Sirius would only rush off because he was taunted? Does Harry have difficulty believing that Sirius could have rushed to his rescue out of love for him and a desire to save him, as he could not save James and Lily? Does Harry have a problem believing that people could love him enough to risk their lives? 8. Ok, I've been dying to ask this question for months. It's come up once or twice before with no response. Did Snape see that Harry's face was covered in blood? He did have a lantern with him, and when they entered the school there was a lot of light. If he did see it, why didn't he comment or why didn't he realize that Harry had not been late on purpose, that something must have happened to Harry on the way? If you believe he didn't see it, why not, how could he not see it? With all the extra security and all that going on in the wizarding world, why didn't he ask Harry how his face got bloodied? Were his snarky comments to Harry on the walk up to the castle just the usual routine, done to keep up appearances, or does he still seriously hate him so much? 9. Hermione tells Harry that Hagrid was only a few minutes late, yet Snape had said that Tonks' message to Hagrid couldn't reach him, because Hagrid was late, and that was why, he, Snape, had taken the message instead. Was this true? Do you think Snape intercepted the patronus message before it could reach its intended recipient? How long do Patronuses take to arrive with a message? Did it arrive when Hagrid was not there? Did Snape intercept the message because he was supposed to protect Harry, or just to have another golden opportunity to give him a bad time? 10. Is there any significance to the fact that Trelawney is at the start of term feast? Is this only the second time we've seen her at the feast? 11. Toward the end of this chapter, we have two different situations with Ron, both that jumped out at me in different ways. First in the conversation with nearly Headless Nick, was this meant to be comic relief, or showing Ron's insensitivity? Later, as Harry tells Ron the story of what happened on the train, he believes Ron shows his friendship by not laughing. Does this show anything about Ron's character, or is this just normal for any kid his age? 12. Throughout the book, Harry asks about Dumbledore's hand, and he is repeatedly told that he'll learn what happened later. He never does. Will the exact details of what happened to the hand be important later, either in what Harry has to do or in understanding what happened on the tower? 13. Here is one of my favorite parts in the book, for surprise value, Dumbledore announcing Slughorn as Potions teacher. How did you react when you read Dumbledore's announcement of Slughorn as potions master? Were you shocked? Did you expect it at all? When Harry and Dumbledore were going to meet Slughorn, did you think it was to hire him for DADA? 14. I have racked my brains and can't remember any place in the books where it is stated as fact that Dumbledore did not trust Snape and that is why he has never given him the DADA post before. Is this a case of rumor and gossip becoming fact over time? Why indeed did Dumbledore give or not give Snape the job? Has Snape really wanted it all these years? Did you think about the DADA curse when you heard that Snape had the position? Was Harry correct in detecting the look of triumph on Snape's face? He hates him so much, that every expression must be well known to him, yet his hatred may not make him a very reliable judge of such things. 15. How do you feel about Harry's savage comment that at least it means Snape will be gone by the end of the year? Did Harry's comment about keeping his fingers crossed for another death disturb you? 16. Do you think Dumbledore's specific mentioning of not wandering after bedtime is aimed at the trio in particular? 17. When Harry tells Ron about the things he overheard Draco saying on the train, we see more doubt on the part of Harry's circle about his suspicions of Draco. Why doesn't Ron believe that Draco is up to anything? Sherry Who apologizes for the length but who didn't realize how much there was in this chapter when she chose it. Thanks for letting me lead a chapter! This was so fun! NOTE: For more information on HPfGU's chapter discussions, please see "HPfGU HBP Chapter Discussions" at http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/database From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Mon Jan 16 17:12:53 2006 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2006 17:12:53 -0000 Subject: CHAPDISC: HBP8, Snape Victorious In-Reply-To: <002a01c61ab8$b41be730$0400a8c0@pensive> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146546 Sherry: > 1. This is the first mention of nonverbal spells in the book, > though it becomes important later as we know. Did it catch you at > all at this point, or did you just pass over it as you wondered how > he'd get out of this pickle? SSSusan: I didn't catch its importance, in terms of the emphasis that would be coming on NVS in this book, no. I don't think it was 'til after I started the book through for the second time that I really noticed how very much NVS were present (which was especially interesting for those who've theorized that Snape didn't actually cast an AK but merely verbalized it while he *focused* on some other spell non- verbally). Sherry: > 2. Harry despises himself for wishing there would be the sound of > panic, people wondering what had happened to him. He has always > hated his celebrity, but in this situation, it might have helped. > Later in the chapter, when he is at the Gryffindor table and > feeling embarrassed, he hopes the students will just assume he was > off doing something heroic. How do you feel about his thoughts in > this situation? Does it seem inconsistent, practical, or natural > to you? SSSusan: Seems perfectly natural to me. One, the notion of celebrity *has* to be growing on him, in the sense of his AWARENESS of it and its being a part of who he is, by this time. I do think that, down deep, he still doesn't LIKE it much, but he's not stupid -- he's aware in the train situation of its potential USEFULNESS. That seems sensible to me -- letting his mind wander to "Well, for ONCE it would be nice if...." But I think his despising the thought does speak to his basic comfort level & preference still being for anonymity. Sherry: > 3. Here we see Tonks jump off a moving train. All through the > last book, OOTP, we are shown how clumsy Tonks is. ...But here > we see her casually leaping off a moving train. What did you think > of this? We learn later that Tonks has lost her metamorphmagus > ability. Do you think her ability to change her appearance could > be part of why she is clumsy? Is it possible that she isn't very > well coordinated because of her metamorphing? Will she be clumsy > again now that she has her ability back at the end of HBP? Or is > there something more sinister going on here? Is this really > Tonks? SSSusan: These are fascinating questions. I'd never thought about the possibility that Tonks losing her metamorphmagus ability might *make* her less clumsy and awkward. But -- okay, confession time -- as I read, I did wonder whether this was indeed Tonks. In fact, this lack of clumsiness and her gloominess and her changed patronus all made me think... even though I was *never* in SAD DENIAL... that Tonks was somehow actually Sirius! (Okay, throw rotten tomatoes at me, I can take it -- it was just a thought that flitted into my mind as I read this. :-)) Sherry: > 5. Snape tells Tonks that Harry is "quite--ah--safe in my hands." > Is there any implication in his words here, or is it just done for > emphasis, to add some sharpness, for Harry's benefit? Or for > Tonks? Just curious about how this was written. Any thoughts? SSSusan: It *is* a curiously written phrase... almost as if Snape had to stop himself from saying something else? Or was searching for an appropriate word to use? It does sound a little ominous, frankly. I've *no* idea what its signifance is. Sherry: > 6. Why do you think Snape made these comments about [Tonks'] > patronus? He hasn't seemed to have any particular feelings one way > or the other about Tonks previously; in fact, did we ever see them > interact before? Why does he say that her patronus is weak? SSSusan: Oh, I just took this as typical Snape-is-a-prick behavior, actually. Truthfully, though, since *I* first thought the patronus was a dog (Sirius), not a wolf (Lupin), on the first read-through I figured it was Snape not being able to resist another dig at Sirius. Now that we know it was a wolf, representing Lupin, and that Snape called it weak while presumably recognizing it correctly as a wolf *is* a curiosity. Sherry: > 7. Whatever you think of that belief, why do you think > Harry would so easily believe that Sirius would only rush off > because he was taunted? Does Harry have difficulty believing that > Sirius could have rushed to his rescue out of love for him and a > desire to save him, as he could not save James and Lily? Does > Harry have a problem believing that people could love him enough to > risk their lives? SSSusan: I think it's two things. One, Harry hates Snape and *wants* -- at least on one level -- to continue blaming him for Sirius' death. Two, I think it's an *awful* thought for Harry to have to face that someone may have died because he loved him. Who wants THAT guilt?? The kid probably feels like ANYbody who cares about him or gets too near him gets hurt. It's probably a pretty natural defense mechanism to displace the blame in order to keep from having to face love of him (Harry) as the reason for Sirius' death. Sherry: > 8. Ok, I've been dying to ask this question for months. It's come > up once or twice before with no response. Did Snape see that > Harry's face was covered in blood? ...If he did see it, why didn't > he comment or why didn't he realize that Harry had not been late on > purpose... Why didn't he ask Harry how his face got bloodied? SSSusan: I had not noticed this, but you're right. How could Snape NOT have seen the blood and mess? I can see Snape having said something *obnoxious* about it, which assumed Harry had been doing something against the rules or stupid, but I can't understand why NO comment was made. And if he did notice, why didn't he take care of him or send him to Madam Pomfrey? More curious Snape behavior. Sherry: > 10. Is there any significance to the fact that Trelawney is at the > start of term feast? SSSusan: Well, we do know that she's now having to *share* her Divination position with Firenze and that she's none too happy about it. Perhaps she's trying to be more of a *presence* amongst the staff and students, in order to look like a part of the team? or to keep an eye on Firenze? Sherry: > 11. Later, as Harry tells Ron the story of what happened on the > train, he believes Ron shows his friendship by not laughing. > Does this show anything about Ron's character, or is this just > normal for any kid his age? SSSusan: Well, I think it's typical Ron behavior, yes, but I also think Harry's thinking shows that HE might've also been tempted to laugh if the tables had been turned and it was Ron who'd had his nose stomped on. Sherry: > 12. Throughout the book, Harry asks about Dumbledore's hand, and > he is repeatedly told that he'll learn what happened later. He > never does. Will the exact details of what happened to the hand be > important later, either in what Harry has to do or in understanding > what happened on the tower? SSSusan: You know, I'm re-reading HBP again right now, and last night I got to the chapter where Harry finally learns about DD's theory of the 7 soul parts/6 horcruxes. In the discussion between Harry & DD, DD talks about how they each have already destroyed one horcrux, and when Harry seems surprised by this, DD holds up his hand and tells him that the ring had been a horcrux. As I read this, I wondered if this isn't one of those situations where we FANS want more of an explanation and where JKR thinks we've already been answered. No, we didn't get the *specifics* of the curse which was on the ring nor how/why it almost killed DD, but we did learn that the hand was damaged while destroying a horcrux -- and wasn't that WHY DD had avoided answering Harry before now -- because Harry didn't yet know about the horcruxes? I won't be surprised if this is all we ever get on the blackened hand. Sherry: > 13. How did you react when you read Dumbledore's announcement of > Slughorn as potions master? Were you shocked? SSSusan: Yep, I was shocked. I fell for it the same way Harry did. Sherry: > 14. Why indeed did Dumbledore give or not give Snape the job? Has > Snape really wanted it all these years? Did you think about the > DADA curse when you heard that Snape had the position? Was Harry > correct in detecting the look of triumph on Snape's face? He hates > him so much, that every expression must be well known to him, yet > his hatred may not make him a very reliable judge of such things. SSSusan: I think DD never gave the job to Snape before now because he felt Snape was too important to LOSE... and, knowing about the jinx, he knew whenever/if ever he gave the job to Snape, he *would* lose him somehow or other. As for Snape, he may have wanted the job, he may not have. I do believe he has a real affinity for potions. OTOH, I also believe that Snape has been *willing* to take the DADA position at any time. I believe he knew about the curse and was willing to take on the risk whenever DD felt it was time. I don't think DD *wanted* Snape to take the job this year, either, but I think he felt there was no choice -- either that he needed Slughorn on staff and so had to move Snape or felt that they were running out of time and options and so now was the time to take Snape up on his offer. All speculation, of course. Sherry: > 15. How do you feel about Harry's savage comment that at least it > means Snape will be gone by the end of the year? Did Harry's > comment about keeping his fingers crossed for another death disturb > you? SSSusan: Nah, it didn't really disturb me. Haven't we all said stuff like this that we didn't REALLY mean? I think he's just spouting off. Of course, at the end of the book, when he's chasing after Snape, THEN he really meant it! But I'm not sure he truly did at this point. Nice job, Sherry! :-) Siriusly Snapey Susan From irene_mikhlin at btopenworld.com Mon Jan 16 17:25:46 2006 From: irene_mikhlin at btopenworld.com (Irene Mikhlin) Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2006 17:25:46 +0000 (GMT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] CHAPDISC: HBP8, Snape Victorious In-Reply-To: <002a01c61ab8$b41be730$0400a8c0@pensive> Message-ID: <20060116172546.54061.qmail@web86208.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 146547 Great questions. --- Sherry Gomes wrote: > 4. Some have said that we didn't see enough of > Harry grieving for Sirius. > What do you think of this scene, with Harry's > thoughts about Tonks and his > inability to talk to her about Sirius? Does this > show his grief to you? Yes, in a typically "Harry" way. Would not feel real if he went into long, soul-baring talks, even with friends. > > 5. I just noticed this when working on this chapter > and actually reading it > in braille instead of hearing audio where I can't > tell how a sentence is > punctuated. Snape tells Tonks that Harry is > > "quite--ah--safe in my hands." > > Is there any implication in his words here, or is it > just done for emphasis, > to add some sharpness, for Harry's benefit? Or for > Tonks? Just curious > about how this was written. Any thoughts? That's interesting, yes. Could be just Snape pulling Harry's chains. He probably felt Harry's hatred radiating all the way to Great Hall. >6. Does it > foreshadow events yet to come, or are there > implications about Lupin in > Snape's comments? I think Snape despises Lupin for his strategy of dealing with problems: "hide your head in the sand long enough and it will all go away". > 8. Ok, I've been dying to ask this question for > months. It's come up once > or twice before with no response. Did Snape see > that Harry's face was > covered in blood? He did have a lantern with him, > and when they entered the > school there was a lot of light. But Ron also hasn't noticed it immediately. It's a strange detail, I agree. > 13. Here is one of my favorite parts in the book, > for surprise value, > Dumbledore announcing Slughorn as Potions teacher. > How did you react when > you read Dumbledore's announcement of Slughorn as > potions master? Were you > shocked? Did you expect it at all? When Harry and > Dumbledore were going to > meet Slughorn, did you think it was to hire him for > DADA? We've discussed so many times the possiblity of Snape as DADA teacher in book 6 that I head my suspicions. Especially with Slughorn being Head of Slytherin. Irene ___________________________________________________________ Yahoo! Messenger - NEW crystal clear PC to PC calling worldwide with voicemail http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com From tifflblack at earthlink.net Mon Jan 16 17:37:02 2006 From: tifflblack at earthlink.net (Tiffany Black) Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2006 09:37:02 -0800 Subject: [HPforGrownups] CHAPDISC: HBP8, Snape Victorious In-Reply-To: <002a01c61ab8$b41be730$0400a8c0@pensive> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146548 Sherry: 2. Harry despises himself for wishing there would be the sound of panic, people wondering what had happened to him. He has always hated his celebrity, but in this situation, it might have helped. Later in the chapter, when he is at the Gryffindor table and feeling embarrassed, he hopes the students will just assume he was off doing something heroic. How do you feel about his thoughts in this situation? Does it seem inconsistent, practical, or natural to you? Tiffany: I think it is a perfectly normal way for a sixteen year old to think. When Harry was on the train, it would be perfectly normal to hope someone was worried about him, and when he got to the dining hall, being totally embarrassed that Draco had just stomped all over him, immobilized him and left him to be stranded on the train, he realized that this sounded like a really dumb and embarrassing reason for being late and covered with blood. Having a sixteen year old's need to be thought of as cool, he'd want them to think he'd done something heroic rather than stupid. Sherry: 4. Some have said that we didn't see enough of Harry grieving for Sirius. What do you think of this scene, with Harry's thoughts about Tonks and his inability to talk to her about Sirius? Does this show his grief to you? Tiffany: I do think this shows Harry's grief very well. Harry is the kind of person who keeps his deepest and most intense feelings to himself most of the time, so he shouldn't be expected to be leaving his grief hanging out for all to see. Sirius was very dear to Harry, and it must be difficult to talk to him with people who might remember him differently or say something that will be painful to hear. Sherry: 7. We've discussed Harry's hatred of Snape over Sirius death many times in the past, and I want to go in a different direction with this question. Harry believes that the reason Sirius rushed off to the ministry was because of Snape's taunts. Whatever you think of that belief, why do you think Harry would so easily believe that Sirius would only rush off because he was taunted? Does Harry have difficulty believing that Sirius could have rushed to his rescue out of love for him and a desire to save him, as he could not save James and Lily? Does Harry have a problem believing that people could love him enough to risk their lives? Tiffany: I do think that Harry has trouble with the idea that anyone wants to put themselves at risk for him. He did try to keep five of his friends from going with him to the ministry because he didn't want them to get hurt on his account. Sherry: 9. Hermione tells Harry that Hagrid was only a few minutes late, yet Snape had said that Tonks' message to Hagrid couldn't reach him, because Hagrid was late, and that was why, he, Snape, had taken the message instead. Was this true? Do you think Snape intercepted the patronus message before it could reach its intended recipient? How long do Patronuses take to arrive with a message? Did it arrive when Hagrid was not there? Did Snape intercept the message because he was supposed to protect Harry, or just to have another golden opportunity to give him a bad time? Tiffany: I think that hagrid was probably still overseeing the first years when the partonus came in and couldn't intercept it himself. Sherry: 11. Toward the end of this chapter, we have two different situations with Ron, both that jumped out at me in different ways. First in the conversation with nearly Headless Nick, was this meant to be comic relief, or showing Ron's insensitivity? Later, as Harry tells Ron the story of what happened on the train, he believes Ron shows his friendship by not laughing. Does this show anything about Ron's character, or is this just normal for any kid his age? Tiffany: I do think that Ron is being perfectly normal for his age. Sherry: 13. Here is one of my favorite parts in the book, for surprise value, Dumbledore announcing Slughorn as Potions teacher. How did you react when you read Dumbledore's announcement of Slughorn as potions master? Were you shocked? Did you expect it at all? When Harry and Dumbledore were going to meet Slughorn, did you think it was to hire him for DADA? Tiffany: Yep, I did think that Slughorn was supposed to be the DADA teacher. Like Harry, I simply assumed that was the vacancy being filled. Tiffany From foxmoth at qnet.com Mon Jan 16 17:58:36 2006 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2006 17:58:36 -0000 Subject: CHAPDISC: HBP8, Snape Victorious In-Reply-To: <002a01c61ab8$b41be730$0400a8c0@pensive> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146549 > > 5. I just noticed this when working on this chapter and actually reading it > in braille instead of hearing audio where I can't tell how a sentence is > punctuated. Snape tells Tonks that Harry is > > "quite--ah--safe in my hands." > > Is there any implication in his words here, or is it just done for emphasis, > to add some sharpness, for Harry's benefit? Or for Tonks? Just curious > about how this was written. Any thoughts? > Pippin: There's another time when Snape hesitates to say that he's concerned for Harry's safety. In GoF, after saying that Harry has an unfortunate habit of wandering around after hours, he continues "he should be stopped. For--for his own safety." OTOH, when Snape is furious at Harry for being in Hogsmeade, he has no hesitation about railing at him for risking his life. "Everyone from the Minister of Magic downward has been trying to keep famous Harry Potter safe from Sirius Black" etc. I think Snape is concerned to hide from Harry that he wants Harry to be safe, though he slips up once in a while when he's really angry. It's Snape's job, IMO, to teach Harry how Dark Wizards think, so he doesn't want Harry to think that he, Snape, has any real concern for him. (I'm pretty sure that Snape knew exactly where Harry was in the Egg and the Eye chapter. He has to know where the trick steps are just like everybody else.) > 6. Later in HBP, we learn that Tonks' patronus is now a wolf, and we're led > to suspect it has changed because of her love for Remus. But here at this > point, we don't know any of that yet. Why do you think Snape made these > comments about her patronus? He hasn't seemed to have any particular > feelings one way or the other about Tonks previously; in fact, did we ever > see them interact before? Why does he say that her patronus is weak? What > do you think about the whole significance of the changing patronus? Does it > foreshadow events yet to come, or are there implications about Lupin in > Snape's comments? Pippin: I'm sure that Snape was just as suspicious about Tonks's changed appearance and her altered patronus as we were. I think he was fishing for information. The 'weak' comment is the first indication that Snape may still have some doubts about Lupin. > 8. Ok, I've been dying to ask this question for months. It's come up once > or twice before with no response. Did Snape see that Harry's face was > covered in blood? He did have a lantern with him, and when they entered the > school there was a lot of light. If he did see it, why didn't he comment or > why didn't he realize that Harry had not been late on purpose, that > something must have happened to Harry on the way? If you believe he didn't > see it, why not, how could he not see it? With all the extra security and > all that going on in the wizarding world, why didn't he ask Harry how his > face got bloodied? Were his snarky comments to Harry on the walk up to the > castle just the usual routine, done to keep up appearances, or does he still > seriously hate him so much? > Pippin: I'm sure Draco couldn't wait to tell his buds what he'd done to famous Harry Potter, and Snape had already heardl about it by the time he met Harry at the gate. But I wonder if anyone else believed Draco at first. Leaving blood on Harry's face for all to see would certainly lend credibility to Draco's story, and Snape would certainly think Harry deserved some embarrassment, to say the least, for having been so foolish We know now that Snape is an expert on healing spells, and that magic leaves its trace, so Snape might be able to tell that Harry had been healed already, even if Tonks didn't mention it in her patronus message. It's interesting that Tonks had the power to heal Harry and conjure a patronus, but didn't think to wipe up the blood. It might be a symptom of her depression, but it could also be that since she's never got the hang of cleaning spells, she didn't trust herself to do it. It also could be a clue. Harry's blood dries in a few minutes, yet the trickle of blood on Dumbledore's face was fresh enough to wipe away long after he was supposed to have died. > 9. Hermione tells Harry that Hagrid was only a few minutes late, yet Snape > had said that Tonks' message to Hagrid couldn't reach him, because Hagrid > was late, and that was why, he, Snape, had taken the message instead. Was > this true? Do you think Snape intercepted the patronus message before it > could reach its intended recipient? How long do Patronuses take to arrive > with a message? Did it arrive when Hagrid was not there? Did Snape > intercept the message because he was supposed to protect Harry, or just to > have another golden opportunity to give him a bad time? Pippin: It's probably important to Book Seven's plot that a patronus can be intercepted. Also, that Hagrid was only a few minutes late arriving at the feast does not tell us when Hagrid was expected or how soon before the feast the patronus arrived. But if Snape heard what happened from Draco, he may have been on his way to investigate already. Pippin From sopraniste at yahoo.com Mon Jan 16 16:59:27 2006 From: sopraniste at yahoo.com (Maria Holub) Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2006 08:59:27 -0800 (PST) Subject: Harry Vanquishing LV without killing him. In-Reply-To: <1137403403.775.99811.m19@yahoogroups.com> Message-ID: <20060116165927.66640.qmail@web35608.mail.mud.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 146550 Here's a glib and devil's-advocate sort of way of looking at the idea: Suppose that "vanquish" really does mean just that. Beat him. Defeat him. Not kill him. And suppose that what happened at Godric's Hollow, when Harry was a baby was the "vanquish"-ment referred to by the prophecy? It's already HAPPENED, and any idea that Harry is going to prove the FINAL undoing of Lord Voldemort NOW is just wishful thinking on the part of the Good Guys. No, I don't BELIEVE that, but if we're being literal.... Just a thought. You may commence mud-slinging now. Who knows, maybe I'll be able to start my own Wall of Shame.... Flop __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com From hamstermap at yahoo.com Mon Jan 16 05:03:14 2006 From: hamstermap at yahoo.com (hamstermap) Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2006 05:03:14 -0000 Subject: Dumbledore alive!! (spoiler) Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146551 This might sound ridiculous but I remember reading in book four when Mad-Eye Moody (young Barty Crouch) used the Avada Kedavra curse on the spiders he said that an unaccomplished wizard could not kill another wizard but would probably give them only a nosebleed. But I was wondering could an extremely accomplished wizard and sick wizard (Snape) be able to control the power of the curse. Instead of killing someone just hurting them badly or putting them into a coma but not kill. It's because I guess I don't want to belive Snape's evil and Dumbledore is dead. And if this is possible it would give the good wizards the element of surprise against LV because he thinks DD is dead. Another thought, what if Snape thought of a nonverbal spell and put the magic in that and not the Avada Kedavra verbal spell. And one more thought, I went through the 5th book again and remember them finding a locket that they threw out? "hamstermap" From hamstermap at yahoo.com Mon Jan 16 05:24:32 2006 From: hamstermap at yahoo.com (hamstermap) Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2006 05:24:32 -0000 Subject: Sword is a horcrux Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146552 I don't remember but should go back through but others say that when he attempted for a Hogwarts job for a 2nd time that as he left he made a motion of his hand. What if before the "interview" he had killed someone and as he left he used the horcrux "spell" or whatever it was, only nonverbally I'm just assuming, and if he did he knows it's in a safe place because all of the headmasters would protect it. So, it would be a perfect place for it. "hamstermap" From nonnymouse_X at hotmail.com Mon Jan 16 14:30:32 2006 From: nonnymouse_X at hotmail.com (ereshkigal_doom) Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2006 14:30:32 -0000 Subject: Birthday Lists / Re: Who dies in 7? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146553 Neri: > Or maybe the guys that run JKR's site asked her for a list of > birthdays, and she sent them one but forgot DD and Luna? I think you are right, Neri. Why would JKR send secret messages to fans through her website? I don't think the list of birthdays is meant to be exhaustive. It's just random. I also reckon it will continue to be updated, since it seems to be such a popular feature. We could very well see the website wishing the likes of Dolores Umbridge a happy birthday! Jan From newbrigid at yahoo.com Mon Jan 16 14:46:53 2006 From: newbrigid at yahoo.com (Lia) Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2006 06:46:53 -0800 (PST) Subject: Harry Vanquishing LV without killing him/Prophecies are tricky! In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20060116144653.11112.qmail@web31708.mail.mud.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 146554 Geoff wrote: Yes, but with respect, Shakespeare also gives us the other side of the coin: THIRD APPARITION: .... Macbeth shall never vanquish'd be, until Great Birnam Wood, to high Dunsinane Hill Shall come against him. (The Tragedy of Macbeth, Act IV, Scene I) The way in which Shakespeare worked this prophecy out - as a bit of a con - absolutely incensed J.R.R.Tolkien and was a factor in his creation of the Ents. An interesting point which crossed my mind when typing this quote was the use of "vanquish'd".... Familiar? Lia says: Ack! You've quoted "that Scottish play"! Oh, the foul luck of it all! ;-) (...speaking as a former thespian...) Your mention of Shakespeare and Tolkien in one fell swoop puts me in mind of how often characters in a text will take a prophecy one way, only to discover later on that there's a trickiness or catch inherent in the wording. Think also, in "the Scottish play", of MacDuff being instrumental. No one imagined a man being "of no woman born"...yet, here's MacDuff, from his mother's womb "untimely ripped". Also, there's Eowyn bringing about the demise of the Lord of the Nazgul in LOTR. The prophecy stated that he would not perish by the hand of man...but ah, as we readers all see, Eowyn did not fall into that category: "No living man may hinder me!" "No living man am I! You look upon a woman!" Maybe, as others in this thread have suggested, the "Dark Lord vanquished" prophecy is also subject to more than one interpretation...and only once events have come to pass will we see how things fall into place in keeping with the prophecy. Lia, remembering how Cassandra became a prophetess, yet no nobody ever believed a word she said From mandorino222 at yahoo.com Mon Jan 16 16:51:36 2006 From: mandorino222 at yahoo.com (mandorino222) Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2006 16:51:36 -0000 Subject: CHAPDISC: HBP8, Snape Victorious (DADA job curse) In-Reply-To: <002a01c61ab8$b41be730$0400a8c0@pensive> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146555 Sherry wrote: > > 14. I have racked my brains and can't remember any place in > the books where it is stated as fact that Dumbledore did not > trust Snape and that is why he has never given him the DADA > post before. Is this a case of rumor and gossip becoming fact > over time? Why indeed did Dumbledore give or not give Snape > the job? Has Snape really wanted it all these years? Did > you think about the DADA curse when you heard that Snape had > the position? Was Harry correct in detecting the look of > triumph on Snape's face? He hates him so much, that every > expression must be well known to him, yet his hatred may not > make him a very reliable judge of such things. > > 15. How do you feel about Harry's savage comment that at least > it means Snape will be gone by the end of the year? Okay, here's one thing related to this chapter that I sort of put together as evidence against ESE Snape. Dumbledore KNOWS that the DADA job is cursed. He hasn't held on to a person for more than a year since "Lord Voldemort's Request" (as we learned in the chapter bearing that name.) Dumbledore obviously values his alliance with Snape. He would NOT risk subjecting him to the curse of the DADA job UNLESS he knew that Snape's departure was immanent. This leads me to believe that Snape had told Dumbledore about the Unbreakable Vow, and that Dumbledore gave Snape the DADA job because he knew that Snape would not be able to return to Hogwarts next year anyway (how could he, after killing Dumbledore?). Thoughts? "mandorino222" From lazycreature007 at yahoo.com Sun Jan 15 17:15:54 2006 From: lazycreature007 at yahoo.com (feda ravindran) Date: Sun, 15 Jan 2006 09:15:54 -0800 (PST) Subject: Ginny and how she changes In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20060115171555.20290.qmail@web32803.mail.mud.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 146556 Jade wrote: > Hi... while I agree with you in some parts, that Ginny is > closer with Hermione than with the other boys, I couldn't > help but wonder if that is so, why Ginny bite back Hermione > harshly when Harry used the sectumsempra? that he found in > the book. She could've been a bit mild in telling her off > but instead, she went off harshly. > > If Ginny is smart, she could've figured out that Hermione > doesn't mean any harm at all. She was just worried like > she's always been. Methinks that people often say or do harsh things unintentionally when they are angry. Ginny was trying to justify Harry's action to Hermione who was accusing Harry of doing something really harsh which is true. This only shows Ginny's love for Harry. Afterwards in the book Ginny and Hermione patch up, don't they? It's just at the spur of the moment that make them say such harsh things to each other. "lazycreature007" From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Mon Jan 16 19:23:01 2006 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2006 19:23:01 -0000 Subject: CHAPDISC: HBP8, Snape Victorious In-Reply-To: <002a01c61ab8$b41be730$0400a8c0@pensive> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146557 Sherry: > 1. This is the first mention of nonverbal spells in the book, though it > becomes important later as we know. Did it catch you at all at this point, > or did you just pass over it as you wondered how he'd get out of this > pickle? Alla: Nope, I did not catch the significance on the first read at all. On the reread , yes, of course, I was like "AHA'. She did mention it here first. :-) > > 4. Some have said that we didn't see enough of Harry grieving for Sirius. > What do you think of this scene, with Harry's thoughts about Tonks and his > inability to talk to her about Sirius? Does this show his grief to you? Alla: YES, it really does. I completely disagree with those who argue that JKR did not handle Harry's grief for Sirius well. Now, I had such fear, mind you when in chapter four Harry was giving his bravado speech to Dumbledore. If that was the only mentioning of Sirius' in this book and Harry went his merry way as if he never had a godfather, I would have been annoyed, BUT Harry does remember Sirius. He cannot talk about him in this scene, he remembers how much he hated the glasses that Dung tried to sell. Harry grieves in a very quite, poignant way, IMO. I loved it. > 5. I just noticed this when working on this chapter and actually reading it > in braille instead of hearing audio where I can't tell how a sentence is > punctuated. Snape tells Tonks that Harry is > > "quite--ah--safe in my hands." > > Is there any implication in his words here, or is it just done for emphasis, > to add some sharpness, for Harry's benefit? Or for Tonks? Just curious > about how this was written. Any thoughts? Alla: Well, that IS weird, I have to agree with SSSusan. It is especially weird to me since you know that I have tremendous doubts about whether Snape is on the side of the white hats. I also think that Snape may have slipped here and Harry is NOT really safe with him, but just speculating of course. My main reaction - weird. > 6. Later in HBP, we learn that Tonks' patronus is now a wolf, and we're led > to suspect it has changed because of her love for Remus. But here at this > point, we don't know any of that yet. Why do you think Snape made these > comments about her patronus? He hasn't seemed to have any particular > feelings one way or the other about Tonks previously; in fact, did we ever > see them interact before? Why does he say that her patronus is weak? What > do you think about the whole significance of the changing patronus? Does it > foreshadow events yet to come, or are there implications about Lupin in > Snape's comments? Alla: Hmmm, I would LOVE to know the significance of the changing patronus. I tend to agree in light of the earlier discussions on this topic that it may foreshadow that somebody else's Patronus will change. As to Snape's comments per se, I think that was another dig at poor Remus, although have no idea why he would call Remus weak. Because Remus cannot hold a job and ill once a month? > 7. Whatever you think of that belief, why do you think > Harry would so easily believe that Sirius would only rush off because he was > taunted? Does Harry have difficulty believing that Sirius could have rushed > to his rescue out of love for him and a desire to save him, as he could not > save James and Lily? Does Harry have a problem believing that people could > love him enough to risk their lives? Alla: Again, I agree with SSSusan and want to add that yes, IMO Harry has trouble believing that people will risk their lives only out of love for him. Where would he learn it? At Dursleys? > 8. Ok, I've been dying to ask this question for months. It's come up once > or twice before with no response. Did Snape see that Harry's face was > covered in blood? He did have a lantern with him, and when they entered the > school there was a lot of light. If he did see it, why didn't he comment or > why didn't he realize that Harry had not been late on purpose, that > something must have happened to Harry on the way? If you believe he didn't > see it, why not, how could he not see it? With all the extra security and > all that going on in the wizarding world, why didn't he ask Harry how his > face got bloodied? Were his snarky comments to Harry on the walk up to the > castle just the usual routine, done to keep up appearances, or does he still > seriously hate him so much? Alla: OK, I told you already, but BRAVO. Well-spotted. You know it is funny. Before I reread the chapter 8, I did not catch it AT ALL. My recollection of the events was that Tonks healed Harry and he was OK and no blood on him either. What can I say? I don't need additional evidence that Snape enjoys seeing Harry in emotional pain, I think books are full of such examples, BUT this is IMO such a clear example that Snape enjoys Harry being in physical pain, as long as he is not dying, IMO. There WAS a lot of light, if Snape did not see it when they were in the corridor, he had no way of not catching it when they were in Great Hall. Tonks did NOT tell in her message that she fixed Harry's nose. SO, we have a teacher seeing student with A LOT of blood on his face and doing NOTHING about it. Hmmmm, curious, very curious. Just reinforces my opinion that Snape is a sadist, really. I remember that the arguments were made about Snape not preventing Hermione from going to hospital wing, when he told her "I see no difference" about her teeth. I guess Hermione should have been grateful that Snape was not preventing her from getting medical attention. :-) Here, Snape does nothing, just continues to taunt Harry. I wonder if Harry would have dropped unconscious from the blood loss, would Snape paid any attention. I am quite convinced that Snape enjoys when Harry is in pain emotional or physical. THANK YOU for spotting another example of that ( IMO of course), which JKR hides in plain site rather nicely. IMO. Now, Snape may not want Harry DEAD ( either for the reason of Life debt hanging over him or because he may want to see who wins in the final confrontation IMO), but I think that "Harry in pain" is one of Snape favorite shows to watch. IMO of course. Remember at the end, when Snape stops Harry from being Crucioed? He has no gripes hitting him with a course, which hurts and makes Harry hitting his head too. I think that if Snape was sure that those DE will not cause Harry permanent damage with crucio, he would not have stopped them either. Speculating in this instance of course. > 11. Toward the end of this chapter, we have two different situations with > Ron, both that jumped out at me in different ways. First in the > conversation with nearly Headless Nick, was this meant to be comic relief, > or showing Ron's insensitivity? Later, as Harry tells Ron the story of what > happened on the train, he believes Ron shows his friendship by not laughing. > Does this show anything about Ron's character, or is this just normal for > any kid his age? Alla: I LOVE Ron dearly and would never figure out why so many people in fandom dislike him so. He IS great, loyal, talented kid which grows on me with every book. I think that Harry was exactly right - it would have been understandable if Ron laughed, but he did not, because he was able to comprehend that Harry really does not need more teasing. Sigh, I want those three alive and well at the end and live happily ever after :-) > 12. Throughout the book, Harry asks about Dumbledore's hand, and he is > repeatedly told that he'll learn what happened later. He never does. Will > the exact details of what happened to the hand be important later, either in > what Harry has to do or in understanding what happened on the tower? Alla: Depends IMO it may be important IF Dumbledore was indeed dying through the book, which I am NOT buying as of today. It can also be important IMO if Harry will need to go through exact same protection curse that hurt Dumbledore to destroy Horcrux. > 13. Here is one of my favorite parts in the book, for surprise value, > Dumbledore announcing Slughorn as Potions teacher. How did you react when > you read Dumbledore's announcement of Slughorn as potions master? Were you > shocked? Did you expect it at all? When Harry and Dumbledore were going to > meet Slughorn, did you think it was to hire him for DADA? Alla: Yes I assumed that it was for DADA and nope, I did not expect Slughorn as Potions teacher at all. I liked it too. > 14. I have racked my brains and can't remember any place in the books where > it is stated as fact that Dumbledore did not trust Snape and that is why he > has never given him the DADA post before. Is this a case of rumor and > gossip becoming fact over time? Why indeed did Dumbledore give or not give > Snape the job? Has Snape really wanted it all these years? Did you think > about the DADA curse when you heard that Snape had the position? Was Harry > correct in detecting the look of triumph on Snape's face? He hates him so > much, that every expression must be well known to him, yet his hatred may > not make him a very reliable judge of such things. Alla: Well, actually I was convinced before HBP that Snape did not want the DADA job and it was just a ruse on Dumbledore's behalf, I thought so despite the fact that Snape told Umbridge in OOP that he was applying for the job every year and did not get it. I thought Snape was lying, but now yes I am convinced that he wanted the job. Why Dumbledore did not give him the job that IMO remains to be seen. What also remains to be seen IMO is whether Snape was glad to get the job this year, how much he really knew about DADA curse and did he know AT ALL. See, I am not sure about Harry " being sure that he may have detected the look of triumph on Snape's face" ( paraphrase). I am NOT usually jumping to buy the arguments that characters' behavior are completely different just because Harry is the one who reports it ( I mean, Harry may INTERPRET facts incorrectly and jump to the wrong conclusions often enough, but he reports facts correctly for the most part IMO), but in this situation I am not sure at all. Harry is sure that he MAY have detected the look of triumph on Snape. I wonder if that was exactly his facial expression. Was it really fear? Disappointment? I wonder. > 17. When Harry tells Ron about the things he overheard Draco saying on the > train, we see more doubt on the part of Harry's circle about his suspicions > of Draco. Why doesn't Ron believe that Draco is up to anything? Alla: I found it SO disappointing that Harry's friends did not believe him. It is like in this book Harry does what he is supposed to do - he does NOT keep his suspicions to himself, he tells his friends, he tells adults and NOBODY does anything ( or at least does not do enough)IMO. I think Ron simply did not realize that Draco would be so eager to jump into preparing murder attempts that early. Ron probably thought that Draco will at least graduate before following into Lucius steps. IMO of course. > > Sherry > Who apologizes for the length but who didn't realize how much there was in > this chapter when she chose it. Thanks for letting me lead a chapter! This > was so fun! > Alla: I snipped some of the questions - I want to hear what others have to say, but it was SO FUN. Thank you again. From maria8162001 at yahoo.com Mon Jan 16 19:41:07 2006 From: maria8162001 at yahoo.com (Maria Vaerewijck) Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2006 11:41:07 -0800 (PST) Subject: Keys to future??? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20060116194108.43958.qmail@web53207.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 146558 Latha279 wrote: There was this one thing that I noticed recently. In JKR's site, the fan-sites key leads to a window where a lot of trophies are displayed along with the ones for the fan-sites she likes. these (on the top row) have names of people who are seriously injured (Frank Longbottom) or those that are dead (James and Sirius) and also Tom Riddle. (I personally consider Tom Riddle dead, too; although LV is alive). The bottom row's trophies are not fully seen. Now my question is, the middle row shows names like - Percy Weasley, ___Evans and Bellatrix!!! What does that mean? who is ___ Evans?? if Lily, why? and why are Percy's and Bella's names there? Does it indicate that they will be killed in the next book? Maria8162001: That's a good observation, I noticed the names too. The names on the second row are: Bellatrix, Ha__(Harry or Hagrid), Lily Evans(I could see the Lily well)) and Percy Weasley. IF it means they are going to die in book 7 then what's going to happen to the Ha__ as there's a box with question mark in front of it(a medal box). The box near Frank long bottom is empty. Maybe the names do really have significant connections to book. As we we now Frank longbottom is in St.Mungos and he kind of half empty, that's probably the reason the box near his name is empty? Maybe the character that JKR killed already is Percy? Gee, I hope he reconciles first with his family. Just a thought. Maria8162001 From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Mon Jan 16 20:14:15 2006 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2006 20:14:15 -0000 Subject: Tonks' patronus & Snape ignoring HP blood (was: CHAPDISC: HBP8) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146559 Sherry: > > 6. Why do you think Snape made these comments about her > > patronus? Alla: > As to Snape's comments per se, I think that was another dig > at poor Remus, although have no idea why he would call Remus weak. > Because Remus cannot hold a job and ill once a month? SSSusan: Exactly why I thought it made MORE sense when I read it the first time and thought Snape's dig was at *Sirius* (when I thought the patronus was a dog and represented Sirius). That all made sense with their history and with Snape's general demeanor towards & attitude about Sirius. But Remus?? I mean, no, they're not friendly, but we never see Snape in Remus' face, taunting him or with wands drawn. In fact, we know that he managed to set aside any old grudges enough to make the wolfsbane potion for him the year Remus was at Hogwarts. So why the "weak" remark NOW? Why insult Remus NOW? Why say something so mean to Tonks? Presumably he knew what her patronus' shape meant -- that she had feelings for Remus. And if so, then making fun of it is extra-nasty. It does seem to indicate a lack of warmth towards Tonks, doesn't it? As well as a dig at Remus? I just don't quite get where this came from... whereas when I thought it was a dog patronus representing Sirius, it "fit" better with what we know about Snape and Sirius. Alla: > What can I say? I don't need additional evidence that Snape enjoys > seeing Harry in emotional pain, I think books are full of such > examples, BUT this is IMO such a clear example that Snape enjoys > Harry being in physical pain, as long as he is not dying, IMO. > There WAS a lot of light, if Snape did not see it when they were in > the corridor, he had no way of not catching it when they were in > Great Hall. ...SO, we have a teacher seeing student with A LOT of > blood on his face and doing NOTHING about it. Hmmmm, curious, very > curious. Just reinforces my opinion that Snape is a sadist, really. SSSusan: It really is hard to avoid this interpretation, I think. I mean, we've had this discussion a million times on HPfGU. "Snape's sadistic!"/"No, he's just a tough teacher in the Britsh Boarding School mold!"/"But Jo Herself called him 'sadistic'!" Yadda yadda yadda. On first thought, it's hard to imagine this as meaning anything else. Then Pippin provided this thought: >>>I'm sure Draco couldn't wait to tell his buds what he'd done to famous Harry Potter, and Snape had already heardl about it by the time he met Harry at the gate. But I wonder if anyone else believed Draco at first. Leaving blood on Harry's face for all to see would certainly lend credibility to Draco's story, and Snape would certainly think Harry deserved some embarrassment, to say the least, for having been so foolish.<<< SSSusan again: Now, I think that's a fascinating take. STILL doesn't mean Snape wasn't just being sadistic, of course, but at least it goes a little further towards explaining what he might have been *thinking.* Siriusly Snapey Susan From kchuplis at alltel.net Mon Jan 16 19:43:58 2006 From: kchuplis at alltel.net (Karen) Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2006 13:43:58 -0600 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: CHAPDISC: HBP8, Snape Victorious References: Message-ID: <001b01c61ad5$319851a0$b301010a@ConsolidatedTelephone.local> No: HPFGUIDX 146560 Alla: Well, actually I was convinced before HBP that Snape did not want the DADA job and it was just a ruse on Dumbledore's behalf, I thought so despite the fact that Snape told Umbridge in OOP that he was applying for the job every year and did not get it. I thought Snape was lying, but now yes I am convinced that he wanted the job. Why Dumbledore did not give him the job that IMO remains to be seen. kchuplis: You know, we had liberal experience that Snape was a talented potion maker before HBP, but the revelation that he is the HBP capped it. I rather think that Snape was better placed in potions, except in regards to the few Gryffindors that he was so hard on that he made them too nervous to perform well (Harry and Ron included). I've never quite bought that Harry was "cheating" by using the Prince's recipes. A recipe is a recipe and being out from under Snape's thumb definitely helped him. To be quite honest, Snape's forte really is potions. Also those who do cannot always teach, however, I think that mostly we have the Harry skewed vision of Snape again. Once DD acquired the man who probably taught Snape potions, it makes sense to move him to DADA. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Mon Jan 16 20:24:29 2006 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2006 20:24:29 -0000 Subject: Snape ignoring HP blood (was: CHAPDISC: HBP8) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146561 >Pippin provided this thought: > >>>I'm sure Draco couldn't wait to tell his buds what he'd done to > famous Harry Potter, and Snape had already heardl about it by the > time he met Harry at the gate. But I wonder if anyone else believed > Draco at first. Leaving blood on Harry's face for all to see would > certainly lend credibility to Draco's story, and Snape would > certainly think Harry deserved some embarrassment, to say the least, > for having been so foolish.<<< > > SSSusan again: > Now, I think that's a fascinating take. STILL doesn't mean Snape > wasn't just being sadistic, of course, but at least it goes a little > further towards explaining what he might have been *thinking.* Alla: Right, I was supposed sign off fifteen minutes ago and I am still here and this is all your fault :-) I am not sure I follow ( and I realise you agree with Snape as sadist line of thought too, or at least you find it possible, right?), so I guess I don't follow Pippin. So, suppose Draco TOLD his buds what he did to Harry. Which I am not convinced in the first place, since that would mean a punishment for Draco, IMO. In any event that would mean that Harry is lying there with broken nose and with blood possibly going down his throat. Unless Snape knows that Harry is HEALED, whether Draco told his buds what he did or not, is IMO irrelevant. What am I missing? How knowing about Harry's predicament from Draco makes Snape less sadistic or not sadistic? Alla From lazycreature007 at yahoo.com Sun Jan 15 17:24:39 2006 From: lazycreature007 at yahoo.com (feda ravindran) Date: Sun, 15 Jan 2006 09:24:39 -0800 (PST) Subject: Snape's loyalties WAS: Re: HBP: Why I am 98.6% certain that... In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20060115172439.23153.qmail@web32803.mail.mud.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 146562 > Raeangelavhs: > I believe Snape is still good and I would like to add > a piece of evidence not yet mentioned. Ltrain138: > Something to consider: IF Snape is really good than he has > managed to hoodwink the most powerful Occlumens in the world > (Voldemort). If he has achieved that, his power is far greater > than I could have imagined. lazycreature007: Even I have a feeling that Snape is good. He killed Dumbledore on the latter's instructions only since he had already grown weak and must not have wanted to die in the hands of the death eaters. Even when the death eaters are about to kill Harry, Snape stops them saying Voldemort wants Harry -- even then he saves Harry. From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Mon Jan 16 20:38:09 2006 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2006 20:38:09 -0000 Subject: Snape ignoring HP blood (was: CHAPDISC: HBP8) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146563 Pippin provided this thought: >>>I'm sure Draco couldn't wait to tell his buds what he'd done to famous Harry Potter, and Snape had already heardl about it by the time he met Harry at the gate. But I wonder if anyone else believed Draco at first. Leaving blood on Harry's face for all to see would certainly lend credibility to Draco's story, and Snape would certainly think Harry deserved some embarrassment, to say the least, for having been so foolish.<<< SSSusan: > > Now, I think that's a fascinating take. STILL doesn't mean Snape > > wasn't just being sadistic, of course, but at least it goes a > > little further towards explaining what he might have been > > *thinking.* Alla: > Right, I was supposed sign off fifteen minutes ago and I am still > here and this is all your fault :-) > > I am not sure I follow ( and I realise you agree with Snape as > sadist line of thought too, or at least you find it possible, > right?), so I guess I don't follow Pippin. > > So, suppose Draco TOLD his buds what he did to Harry. Which I am > not convinced in the first place, since that would mean a > punishment for Draco, IMO. In any event that would mean that Harry > is lying there with broken nose and with blood possibly going down > his throat. Unless Snape knows that Harry is HEALED, whether Draco > told his buds what he did or not, is IMO irrelevant. What am I > missing? > > How knowing about Harry's predicament from Draco makes Snape less > sadistic or not sadistic? SSSusan: Hee. Far be it from ME to make anyone linger on the computer, Alla!;- ) So I shall dash off a response as quickly as possible. In short, I *do* think Snape's behavior is nasty here, but I think Pippin's proposed scenario explains the behavior in a way that makes more SENSE than the way I read the scene myself, originally. I think the key to what Pippin wrote is "and Snape had already heard about it by the time he met Harry at the gate." The way I read this was that Draco bragged to his buddies and that Snape heard (or heard about) the conversation. I think Draco *assumes* he won't be punished by Snape for such things (or else didn't care or didn't realize Snape heard). THEN, Snape being the loving, altruistic, magnanimous kind of guy that he is (snort!), he decided that it would be FUNNY or, well, maybe not that, but APPROPRIATE somehow if he ignored Harry's injury/blood and let him be embarrassed in front of his schoolmates. So, yes, I'm still saying that Snape didn't act very nicely at all -- that he did something some of us might qualify as sadistic (or at least mean) -- but at least, for me, this scenario made it less *confusing* why he'd not have looked surprised or mentioned the blood. In Pippin's scenario, Snape already *knew* about the blood before he got to Harry and had made up his mind to ignore it if Harry didn't bring it up. If Snape had no inkling of what had happened in advance of meeting Harry at the gate, then his behavior in ignoring the blood is more confusing to me. If he did already know what happened, then he could keep a straight face and wouldn't have had reason to show surprise at the presence of so much blood. Either way, he's a git here. IMHO, of course; YMMV. ;-) Siriusly Snapey Susan From maria8162001 at yahoo.com Mon Jan 16 18:43:20 2006 From: maria8162001 at yahoo.com (Maria Vaerewijck) Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2006 10:43:20 -0800 (PST) Subject: Patronus characteristics (was Re: Cheating) In-Reply-To: <23b.542133b.30fc702e@aol.com> Message-ID: <20060116184320.22974.qmail@web53203.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 146564 Ceridwen wrote: > The nagging problem for me in a Patronus being sent is, > Dumbledore is shut up in a tomb. If he's sending a Patronus, > and he's alive in there, it stirs all the ancient fears of > being buried alive. Of course, with Dumbledore, there will > always be some out, some secret passage or some way for him > to not be stuck in there with life draining away (can one > Apparate from inside a sealed tomb?). maria8162001: But we can't really be certain that Dumbledore's buried alive or that his body is really sealed in the tomb. There's a possibility that he able to remove his self/body before the tomb was sealed. As we found out in the CS that 'he can make himself invisible without invisibility cloak' and I read from the HP Lexicon that 'he can cast spell without wand.' What do you think? It's impossible of course but I still can't believe he's really dead, I'm clinging for some desperate hope. :) maria8162001 From zarleycat at sbcglobal.net Mon Jan 16 20:37:45 2006 From: zarleycat at sbcglobal.net (kiricat4001) Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2006 20:37:45 -0000 Subject: CHAPDISC: HBP8, Snape Victorious In-Reply-To: <002a01c61ab8$b41be730$0400a8c0@pensive> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146565 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Sherry Gomes" wrote: > Discussion questions > 3. Here we see Tonks jump off a moving train. All through the last book, > OOTP, we are shown how clumsy Tonks is. She constantly breaks things or > trips over things. It becomes comic relief throughout that book. But here > we see her casually leaping off a moving train. What did you think of this? > We learn later that Tonks has lost her metamorphmagus ability. Do you think > her ability to change her appearance could be part of why she is clumsy? Is > it possible that she isn't very well coordinated because of her > metamorphing? Will she be clumsy again now that she has her ability back at > the end of HBP? Or is there something more sinister going on here? Is this > really Tonks? Marianne: I hadn't thought about Tonks's notable lack of clumsiness in jumping off the moving train. It does seem to be a weird change in her, even if we put it down to the effects of her unrequited love for Remus. I suppose it can be read as just another little clue that all is not right with Tonks, but, OTOH, it seems like a strange symptom to exhibit. > 4. Some have said that we didn't see enough of Harry grieving for Sirius. > What do you think of this scene, with Harry's thoughts about Tonks and his > inability to talk to her about Sirius? Does this show his grief to you? Marianne: Yes, I think Harry is dealing with his grief as best he can. It might not be the best way - to try to close people off from his feelings, to not talk about Sirius, to avoid taking the openings his friends give him to say something, to avoid even the simplest vocal acknowledgment to others, like Tonks, who may also be grieving. But, I think this is completely in character for Harry. But, it still rankles with me that no adult, other than DD, has said anything to Harry about it. > > 6. Later in HBP, we learn that Tonks' patronus is now a wolf, and we're led > to suspect it has changed because of her love for Remus. But here at this > point, we don't know any of that yet. Why do you think Snape made these > comments about her patronus? He hasn't seemed to have any particular > feelings one way or the other about Tonks previously; in fact, did we ever > see them interact before? Why does he say that her patronus is weak? What > do you think about the whole significance of the changing patronus? Does it > foreshadow events yet to come, or are there implications about Lupin in > Snape's comments? Marianne: I think there has to be more significance to a patronus changing that simply Tonks's misery. I believe we've been introduced to it now because it will come up again with a different character in Book 7. As far as Snape's "weak" comment went, yes, I think this is a barb at her because he suspects the change has something to do with Lupin. I notice he also called her Nymphadora, which he must know she dislikes. Perhaps that was another veiled way to let her know that he's aware of the Lupin link of her patronus because Remus also calls her Nymphadora. We all know how Snape despises letting his softer emotions show, how people can betray themselves when they wear their emotions on their sleeves. Tonks' patronus change shows that she is under some sort of emotional distress, thus she is weak in Snape's eyes and her weakness is exposed by the shape of the new patronus. > 7. Harry believes that the reason Sirius rushed off to the ministry was because > of Snape's taunts. Whatever you think of that belief, why do you think > Harry would so easily believe that Sirius would only rush off because he was > taunted? Does Harry have difficulty believing that Sirius could have rushed > to his rescue out of love for him and a desire to save him, as he could not > save James and Lily? Does Harry have a problem believing that people could > love him enough to risk their lives? Marianne: I think we've already been told in this chapter that Harry has become more aware of the part he played in setting in motion the events that led to Sirius's death as evidenced by the following with regards to Tonks: "...it was no more her fault than anyone else's (and much less than his)..." I don't think Harry believes that Sirius rushed off *solely* because Snape shot his mouth off. But, continuing to believe (or want to believe) that this was a major factor allows Harry to continue to blame Snape, which "felt satisfying" and also because, as JKR tells us, Harry knows Snape is not sorry Sirius is dead. Actually, Snape could have thrown the Harry-Snape dynamic into a real spin had he taken a few moments at the end of OoP, or even here at the beginning of HBP and said "Potter, you know Black and I couldn't stand each other, but you have my sympathies over your loss." Snape would have neatly undercut Harry's unmitigated view of him as a heartless bastard. He wouldn't have had to say he was sorry Sirius was dead because both he and Harry know that's not true. But, by acknowledging *Harry's* loss, he would have, at the very least, confused Harry and maybe given Harry a push towards putting Snape's role in all of this in a different light. > 8. Ok, I've been dying to ask this question for months. It's come up once > or twice before with no response. Did Snape see that Harry's face was > covered in blood? He did have a lantern with him, and when they entered the > school there was a lot of light. If he did see it, why didn't he comment or > why didn't he realize that Harry had not been late on purpose, that > something must have happened to Harry on the way? If you believe he didn't > see it, why not, how could he not see it? With all the extra security and > all that going on in the wizarding world, why didn't he ask Harry how his > face got bloodied? Were his snarky comments to Harry on the walk up to the > castle just the usual routine, done to keep up appearances, or does he still > seriously hate him so much? Marianne: The question could also be asked why didn't Tonks make mention, after she fixed Harry's nose, that he was still a bloody mess? For that matter, why didn't she open the Hogwars gates? Why wait until the person carrying the lantern got there to unlock the gates? But, for Snape's part, it is a curious oversight. I suppose Snape couldn't care less. Harry is obviously not seriously hurt, and if anyone were to take Snape to task for not investigating further, he could always say that he assumed there was no problem because Tonks didn't tell him there was anything to worry about. > 11. Toward the end of this chapter, we have two different situations with > Ron, both that jumped out at me in different ways. First in the > conversation with nearly Headless Nick, was this meant to be comic relief, > or showing Ron's insensitivity? Later, as Harry tells Ron the story of what > happened on the train, he believes Ron shows his friendship by not laughing. > Does this show anything about Ron's character, or is this just normal for > any kid his age? Marianne: Well, technically Ron is telling the truth. NHN is dead, so his protestations on keeping silent to the death about Harry is a bit over the top. I supposed he could have been a little more tactful. But, I can't help contrasting this with Snape's "I see no difference" comment regarding Hermione's teeth in GoF. At least Ron was speaking the truth. The bit about Ron's not laughing comes after DD's somewhat solemn speech about dangerous times, Vmort, ect. so perhaps the boys mood was already more somber than usual. But, has Ron ever laughed at Harry when Harry's been hurt by someone, especially Draco? I can't recall right now that he's ever made light of the bad things that have happened to Harry, so it doesn't surprise me that he wouldn't have laughed. > 15. How do you feel about Harry's savage comment that at least it means > Snape will be gone by the end of the year? Did Harry's comment about > keeping his fingers crossed for another death disturb you? Marianne: Not in the least. I know I'm guilty of making similar tasteless remarks about people. And this is not long after Harry has had his first encounter of the school year with Snape, so the fact that he's nasty about him is not all that surprising to me. > 16. Do you think Dumbledore's specific mentioning of not wandering after > bedtime is aimed at the trio in particular? Marianne: Hadn't thought of it before, but maybe so. Espcially in light of DD telling Harry to keep his cloak with him. Or are those things somewhat contradictory - if Harry's always where he's supposed to be at any given time, why would he need to conceal himself? The other thing that struck me in reading over this chapter is also in DD's speech, where he instructs the students to tell one of the staff if they notice anything strange or suspicious. Harry noticed strange, suspicious things about Draco throughour the year, and not one, not friends or adults, took him seriously. > 17. When Harry tells Ron about the things he overheard Draco saying on the > train, we see more doubt on the part of Harry's circle about his suspicions > of Draco. Why doesn't Ron believe that Draco is up to anything? Marianne: Because Ron has only seen Draco as a school-boy rival who is usually bested by Harry and Co.? Marianne, who enjoyed Sherry's questions From dobbyisdumbledore at yahoo.com Mon Jan 16 20:21:26 2006 From: dobbyisdumbledore at yahoo.com (dobbyisdumbledore) Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2006 20:21:26 -0000 Subject: A request. -- old thread? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146566 I was wondering if there are any semi-old timers that could direct me to the thread that made a splendid case for the Dumbledore kills Sirius in book 5. I would really appreciate it as I would love to look over its well thought out analysis and compare it to what we now know with book 6. Anyone have this logged under a favorites? Or what number this might be? Thanks in advance! "dobbyisdumbledore" From vuurdame at xs4all.nl Mon Jan 16 21:56:48 2006 From: vuurdame at xs4all.nl (festuco) Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2006 21:56:48 -0000 Subject: Birthday Lists / Re: Who dies in 7? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146567 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "ereshkigal_doom" wrote: > > Neri: > > Or maybe the guys that run JKR's site asked her for a list of > > birthdays, and she sent them one but forgot DD and Luna? Very possible, but I do think that the people who get a birthday wish will be alive at the end of book 7. When I with great trepidation opened the site to see if Snape got a card and saw with he had I (when I finished dancing for joy) saw the card was dated with the correct date, so JKR wished him a happy birthday in 2006. It would be really strange to wish a dead person a happy birthday, so I am much more hopeful now. Yet on the other hand, one never knows for sure. On the many deaths comment somebody made, I dont know who it was -sorry for that: I don't believe book 7 will be a bloody mess, because a death is a horrible thing, and JKR wants people to realize that. It will take the importance of a death away if people are killed by the dozens, especially people we got to know. Seamus dead? A tragedy. Half of Gryffindor dead? Readers are not able to comprehend such a loss. Gerry From h2so3f at yahoo.com Mon Jan 16 22:00:05 2006 From: h2so3f at yahoo.com (h2so3f) Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2006 22:00:05 -0000 Subject: Snape's loyalties and DD mistakes In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146568 Alla wrote: > Hmmm. I am not sure about Dumbledore's mistakes not really being > mistakes. JKR pretty much said it didn't she in the July 2005 > interview? CH3ed: Good point there! I do think DD made emotional errors in over- estimating Harry's and Snape's ability to behave rationally in emotionally trying circumstances. A very humanly error of DD. Strategically, tho, I think DD made the right choice in distancing himself from Harry and in not telling Harry much anything in OotP. LV, tho he couldn't possess Harry without getting burnt, had access to Harry's head thru out the book without being noticed (just as Harry did to him...tho unintentionally). I think that caused LV to think that not only were Harry and DD very close, but DD didn't care much about Harry as well (unfortunately Harry also thougth the same thing)... Nothing like the relationship Harry had with Sirius, which LV then seized to his own use...and ended in Sirius' death. Anyway, I suspect that is what discouraged LV from using Harry to get to DD in that Book....until the battle by the MoM fountain. What the alternative would have been I really don't know, but I'd rather that Sirius snuff it in OotP rather than DD... if one of them had to go. Alla wrote: " It is certainly possible IMO that we will find out that Dumbledore was NOT fooled by Snape and Snape is loyal to him till the end( it is not a concession, but just me trying to keep all possibilities in mind in order not to be too dissapointed at the end, if what I think will happen and what I would like to happen doesn't come true :-)), As to Snape hoodwinking greatest Legilimens, yes, I don't see it any either way. IMO he either fooled DD or Voldie or both." CH3ed: Speaking like a good lawyer!! :O) And you have a good odd of being right, too! I'm of the opinion that DD read Snape right, and LV isn't completely fooled by Snape. So I hope Snape doesn't start thinking that he had really fooled LV, or he'll be caught off- guarded when LV finally decides that Snape's usefulness had ran its course and fulfills what he told his DEs in the graveyard scene he'd do to the DE who had left him forever. It would be quite terrible if Snape getting caught off-guard would also compromises Harry's mission in Book 7. CH3ed won't judge an opera until the fat lady had sung. ;O) From agdisney at msn.com Mon Jan 16 22:07:35 2006 From: agdisney at msn.com (Andrea Grevera) Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2006 17:07:35 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Squibs have genes to do magic? References: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146569 "staceyv2220" wrote: > And Mrs. Figg's house smells like cabbage, the same smell > Harry notices at the potion shop in Diagon Alley. > SV > Or maybe she likes to cook cabbage. Gerry Andie: Poly-juice potion also smells like cabbage. She may keep a vat around for some purpose. She wouldn't have to drink it when she would be home alone, only when others are around or she is going out. Before posting to any list, you MUST read the group's Admin File! http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/files/Admin_Files/HBF_Text__MUST_READ Please use accurate subject headings and snip unnecessary material from posts to which you're replying! Yahoo! Groups Links [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From h2so3f at yahoo.com Mon Jan 16 22:27:46 2006 From: h2so3f at yahoo.com (h2so3f) Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2006 22:27:46 -0000 Subject: "Blood" vs. genetics in the HP books (Was: Magic genetics) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146570 CH3ed: I don't think we can explain magic with genetics or ABO blood typing... But.. There's no harm in having fun, ay? How about squibs being the result of Bombay phenotype? The AB antigens are modified form of the H-antigen stub on the red cell surface by 2 different sugars. People with O bloodtype has unmodified H stub. People with "Bombay phenotype"; however, doesn't have the H stub to begin with, and so even if they have the gene for A or B sugar, the sugar won't stick to the RBC surface because of the lack of H stub... So their bloodtype is defaulted O. Tho unlike the normal O types, they can give birth to AB children. And they can't get blood transfusion from the universal doner O negative either because they would react to the H antigen. CH3ed :O) From h2so3f at yahoo.com Mon Jan 16 23:02:29 2006 From: h2so3f at yahoo.com (h2so3f) Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2006 23:02:29 -0000 Subject: Keys to future? and the Sword is a Horcrux In-Reply-To: <20060116194108.43958.qmail@web53207.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146571 CH3ed: I could be wrong but I assume that that is the Hogwarts Trophy Room. I doubt that the names shown are for those who are either injured or dead. They are just Hogwarts students who won awards during their school years. Frank and Alice Longbottom were renown aurors before the attack that left them mad. Tom Riddle was a genius of a student who won an award for special service to the school for turning in Hagrid (tho we know what really happened), and he was Headboy. Percy was also Headboy, and may have won other academic awards as well (since he did get 12 OWLS). Harry won the special service to the school award in rescuing Ginny from the Chamber of Secrets in his second year. Lily Evans was an exceptional potion student (according to Slug). Sirius and James were the brightest students around in their days (per McGonnagal in PoA), and James was a winning Gryffindor seeker. I don't know about Bellatrix, but she is no shabby witch either, having out dueled and killed Sirius in OotP despite having been in Azkaban for years... so she might have been a great student too. As to the Gryffindor sword being made into a horcrux in Dumbledore's presence. Really, how likely is that? DD is supposed to be the only one LV ever feared, the genius of his generation, the wizard who could detect traces of unseen magic placed to protect horcruxes years after the act, the mindreader whom LV had a hard time occlumensing against... And yet LV sat there and made a horcrux out of the Gryffindor sword all undetected right in front of Dumbledore? Sometimes a twitch is just a twitch, you know. CH3ed :O) From katmac at katmac.cncdsl.com Mon Jan 16 23:34:08 2006 From: katmac at katmac.cncdsl.com (lagattalucianese) Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2006 23:34:08 -0000 Subject: Harry the Defender Was Re: Harry Vanquishing LV without killing him In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146572 > > I have something of a moral quandary about Harry not killing > Voldemort. Let's assume the Snape is completely on the "Good" side > (i.e. allied with Dumlbedore and Harry and co.). Now Sanpe was > willing, from a certain point of view, to kill Dumbledore for a plan > that "may" have helped bring about Voldemort's final defeat... > > Quick_Silver (rambling and incoherent at this time in the morning > saying sorry for posting twice but I'm slow tonight) > La Gatta Lucianese: One situation in which Harry killing Voldemort might be morally acceptable: One argument for DDM!Snape killing Dumbledore is that Dumbledore is dying, in pain, has begged Snape to kill him, and that in addition to rescuing Draco and getting the Death Eaters out of Hogwarts, Snape's act is an act of mercy. If Voldemort is reduced, through the destruction of his horcruxes, to an almost powerless, almost soulless monster (or even completely powerless and completely soulless, if he has received the timely attention of a Dementor), might not it be an act of mercy for Harry to kill him, rather than condemn him to go on living in that condition? I can't quite picture the Dark Lord whispering, "Please, Harry...", but one supposes it is possible. And now some random ramblings on souls and living and dying: We know that it is possible for a body to go on living once the soul has been removed from it (PoA.12): "'They call it the Dementor's Kiss,' said Lupin, with a slightly twisted smile. 'It's what dementors do to those the wish to destroy utterly. I suppose there must be some kind of mouth under there, because the clamp their jaws upon the mouth of the victim and--and suck out his soul.' 'What--they kill--?' 'Oh, no,' said Lupin, 'Much worse than that. You can exist without your soul, you know, as long as your brain and heart are still working. But you'll have no sense of self anymore, no memory, no...anything. There's no chance at all of recovery. You'll just-- exist. As an empty shell. And your soul is gone forever...lost.'" Given that the body can survive, in a way, without the soul, let's trot back to my pet theory about reverse horcruxes. Let us suppose that the soul can be removed from a badly injured body and stored in some safe receptacle or host until the body can be restored. As for example, a phoenix. Since the soul is residing in a benevolent host and not a Dementor, it is not "gone forever...lost", merely stored in a safe place until the body can be restored, as for example with the tears of a phoenix (CoS.12, CoS.17). Now just as it takes a powerful Dark Wizard to create a true horcrux, surely it takes a powerful White Wizard to create a reverse horcrux, to remove the soul from the body without damaging it and transfer it to a suitable host for safekeeping. A Wizard who is an expert on Defense Against the Dark Arts. A Wizard with the skill to override a killing curse with...something else. A Wizard who is, perhaps, the only one in the world who knows how to perform this enchantment (HBP.27): "'We need to get you up to the school, sir...Madam Pomfrey...' 'No," said Dumbledore. 'It is Professor Snape whom I need....But I do not think...I can walk very far just yet....' 'Right--sir, listen--I'm going to knock on a door, find a place you can stay--then I can run and get Madam--' 'Severus,' said Dumbledore clearly. 'I need Severus....'" We know that Dumbledore's physical injuries are not fatal. Some bones are broken, but broken bones are no big deal in the Wizarding World. Harry spent one night in the hospital completely regrowing the bones in his right arm, and that was only because that idiot Lockhart tried to mend a broken arm instead of letting Madam Pomfrey perform a simple fix (Cos.10). Otherwise (HBP.28): "Dumbledore's eyes were closed; but for the strange angle of his arms and legs, he might have been sleeping." Nothing a phoenix's tears couldn't heal, if they can overcome the effects of a basilisk's poison. Snape's fury at Harry in the "DO NOT CALL ME COWARD" scene (HBP.28) could have been fueled by a number of things: The difficulty and stress of performing the spell in the first place; the fear that he might have gotten it wrong and actually killed Dumbledore; the uncertainty he faces until he can somehow ditch Draco and get back to finish the enchantment, if that is what he still has to do, get Dumbledore healed with Fawkes' help, get Dumbledore's soul back into his body, and get Dumbledore and Fawkes (and himself) safely on their way to wherever they are variously going. He's had a rough day. I think I would yell at Harry too, under the circumstances. One final note on thestrals, and the possibility that a thestral is Snape's Patronus, and perhaps also his Animagus form: Hagrid on the bad reputation thestrals have (OotP.21): "'But they're really, really unlucky,' interrupted Parvati, looking alarmed. 'They're supposed to bring all sorts of horrible misfortune on people who see them. Professor Trelawney told me once--' 'No, no, no,' said Hagrid, chuckling, 'tha's just superstition, that is, they aren't unlucky, they're dead clever and useful!...'" As Snape has proven to be on numerous occasions, as outlined in Amanda's post #146324, all the while Harry is thinking him evil. I've already quoted Harry's reversal of feeling about the thestrals in OotP.33: "How could he ever have thought them ugly?" From katmac at katmac.cncdsl.com Mon Jan 16 23:40:29 2006 From: katmac at katmac.cncdsl.com (lagattalucianese) Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2006 23:40:29 -0000 Subject: July 31 2007 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146573 > > Geoff: > ... > > Dear me, it seems a long way to 31/07/07 or whatever the date is..... > La Gatta Lucianese: Maybe JKR will be a sweetie and bring it out on January 9, 2007. ;D From bboyminn at yahoo.com Mon Jan 16 23:40:29 2006 From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2006 23:40:29 -0000 Subject: Merlin-DD - Dumbledore LIVES ...or NOT In-Reply-To: <20060115174950.12282.qmail@web53207.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146574 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Maria Vaerewijck wrote: > > Potioncat: > The main reason I think DD is dead, dead as we know it, is that > I don't think JKR would kill someone in one book and have all > the kiddies and adults wait years before finding out he's alive. > If she was going to do that, I think she would have completed it > in one book. ... > > ...edited... > > The most recent Merlin story I've read was by Mary Stewart. In > her version Merlin is put in the cave, but is not really dead. > He does come back to advise Arthur, ... > > But I wouldn't hold my breath. > > maria8162001: > > We have to remember also that Dumbledore can make himself > invisible without the invisibility cloak. ...edityed... What > if during that time he made himself invisible. > ... Just a thought, still can't get over Dumbledore's death. I > need to re-read all the HP books again to see where DD cast a > spell without wand. > > maria8162001 bboyminn: When it comes to 'Dumbledore lives' theories, I can only ask one question ...WHY? What literary purpose does it serve for Dumbledore to fake his own death. How does that help Harry arrive at his objective? Why would Dumbledore abandon Harry just when Harry needs him the most? More so, how and why would Dumbledore choose that particular method to fake his how death? Certainly there are easier ways. The best I can come up with, though I admit it's not too shabby, is that in that moment on the top of the tower, Snape and Dumbledore agreed that there was no way out. One way or another Dumbledore was going to die, either by Draco (not likely), by a Death Eaters (very likely) or by Snape's hand. So, Dumbledore sent a quick short telepathic message to Snape that said 'fake it'. What I am saying here is that Snape appearing to kill Dumbledore wasn't part of some grand plan or conspiracy. It was a desperate act in a desperate moment in which all other courses of action yielded a much worse outcome. So, Snape faked the AK and Dumbledore played along. Once the ruse was set into play, circumstances dictated that everyone continue to play along. So, that explains actions in the moment, but does not explain a long term literary strategy of continuing this ruse. What could be the purpose? Could it be to draw Voldemort into the open? To hope that Voldemort will be over filled with confidence and therefore act in ways that make him more vulnerable? But is that really a good strategy? Wouldn't it be better to keep Voldemort laying low in order to give Harry time to work out the Horcruxes? If we are going to justify Dumbledore still being alive, we have to justify it within the context of the story, and his continuing to live has to have serve some greater purpose. He can't simply live because we don't want him to die. So, If Dumbledore is alive, has he learned his lesson about keeping Harry in the dark, will he reveal himself right away, so Harry is aware that he can continue to draw on Dumbledore as a resource? If he continues to keep Harry in the dark, and simply lurks around in the background, that doesn't really lend much to the story. Also, if it happened in the moment as I described, the how do we explain the appearance of Dumbledore's protrait in the headmaster's office and how do we explain the Phoenix Lament. Those are a little more difficult to fake in the moment. It's not that I don't want Dumbledore alive. I have fanfiction taking place in 2015 the counts on Dumbledore being alive, but independant of that, for it to be true, we have to come up with some way of justifying it in the literary context of the story, and I can't see JKR going in that direction. Just for few thoughts for whatever they are worth. Steve/bboyminn From miles at martinbraeutigam.de Mon Jan 16 23:45:34 2006 From: miles at martinbraeutigam.de (Miles) Date: Tue, 17 Jan 2006 00:45:34 +0100 Subject: Snape's loyalties and DD mistakes WAS: Re: HBP: Why I am 98.6% certain that... References: Message-ID: <00fd01c61af6$f21f1c80$14b2a8c0@rechnerchen> No: HPFGUIDX 146575 dumbledore11214 wrote: > Now, don't get me wrong, it is certainly possible IMO that we will > find out that Dumbledore was NOT fooled by Snape and Snape is loyal > to him till the end( it is not a concession, but just me trying to > keep all possibilities in mind in order not to be too dissapointed at > the end, if what I think will happen and what I would like to happen > will not come true :-)), but IMO IF we find out that DD was wrong, > the books foreshadowed the fact that Dumbledore can make emotional > mistakes really well and those mistakes IMO are huge. ( him dealing > with Harry and Sirius in OOP, him not sharing information about Tom > Riddle, etc.) Miles: If it turned out that Dumbledore was fooled by Snape, then I wouldn't call this an emotional mistake. We don't know the reason why DD trusts Snape, but we know that there *is* a reason. And I think it is quite possible that this reason is beyond a "feeling" of DD, but is connected with facts. Otherwise he simply could tell anybody. > CH3ed: > Strategically, tho, I think DD made the right choice in distancing > himself from Harry and in not telling Harry much anything in OotP. Miles: To do so was right, I agree - Harry was in danger, because it was possible that he could attack DD - which would be much more danger to him than to DD. But the emotional mistake was not to inform Harry *somehow*. He knows Harry, he knows that in desperate situations he tends to act impulsive and without thinking about his own safety. If Dumbledore just dropped a friendly note to Harry from time to time, it would have been enough to prevent the situation in the MoM. Frankly, when I finished OotP first, I was a bit angry about this, because I had and still have a problem to see DDs stupidness concerning Harry's feelings to be in character. Even if DDs emotional considerations are redirected to reason, this mistake should not have happened. Miles From miles at martinbraeutigam.de Mon Jan 16 23:51:35 2006 From: miles at martinbraeutigam.de (Miles) Date: Tue, 17 Jan 2006 00:51:35 +0100 Subject: Draco again and Dumbledore as Phoenix References: Message-ID: <010701c61af7$c95f2d20$14b2a8c0@rechnerchen> No: HPFGUIDX 146576 Andrea Grevera wrote: > Andie: > I found the quote on acquiring a new pet from Quick quotes 2001 > Raincoast books interview. they ask if Harry could have a pet > dragon. She say's no "He's got more sense. He might get a > different pet at some point." I'm looking for the other one but my > labradoodle is trying to learn to type with her nose so... time to > give up. Miles: I like the idea that Fawkes could become Harry's... no, pet is not the right word, such a powerful and intelligent creature seems to be much more a companion. I do not remember where I got it, whether it was canon, or an interview, but Phoenixes choose the wizard they accompany, not the other way round. Now, we saw some situations that gave us the impression that Fawkes is attached to Harry, not least because he is so faithful to Dumbledore. Okay, I just would love to see Fawkes again, because I really liked the scenes with him. But I do think that the guess that Fawkes will be with Harry at some point of book 7 is not too far fetched. Miles From katmac at katmac.cncdsl.com Tue Jan 17 00:23:43 2006 From: katmac at katmac.cncdsl.com (lagattalucianese) Date: Tue, 17 Jan 2006 00:23:43 -0000 Subject: BloodBath in Book 7 Was Re:Who dies in 7? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146577 > > Antosha: > ... > > There's an old truism in war reporting: one death is a tragedy; a > hundred deaths is a statistic. > > As for the elimination of the Ministry and the Order... well, I think > they've both already been sidelined. The last book is going to focus > on Harry & Co's struggle against LV and his minions. The Ministry is > already largely a non-player, and the Order will be up to its eyeballs > off-screen dealing with the kinds of attacks we kept hearing about in > HBP and OotP, while Harry, Ron and Hermione (and possibly, eventually, > Ginny, Neville, Luna, the twins and a few other odd Weasleys and DA > members) actually do the work of destroying the Horcruxes and > vanquishing LV. > La Gatta Lucianese: And statistics are boring. It's an inconvenient habit of people that they are much more interesting when they are alive. When they are presumed dead, they are only interesting if we can debate endlessly over whether they are REALLY dead, and whether the person who killed them REALLY killed them, and if he did, does that make him ESE! or OFH! or DDM!... ;D I am with you; I think Book 7 will be concerned with the doings of HRH and other members of DA hunting down and destroying horcruxes, interspersed, perhaps, with tense scenes in the DE camp, with baddies offing one another over differences sparked by a certain Dark Wizard who REALLY isn't (might we have gotten a foretaste of that in "Spinner's End"?), and maybe Harry and said DW rescuing each other and burying the hatchet (preferably not in each other. > > I still think that any ending that is the equivalent of Dirty!Harry > standing over LV with his wand pointed at his head, saying, "Do you > feel lucky, punk?"--in other words, any ending that's simply a matter > of Harry loading up for bear and blowing Voldemort away--is going to > be unsatisfying. The series seems to be aiming at some sort of message > of love, self-sacrifice and redemption, so macho posturing and alpha > male dominance a la any Arnold Schwartzenegger movie aren't going to > ring true. > > But that's me. > > ;-) > La Gatta Lucianese: Hee! Love it! Seriously, I can see Harry killing Voldemort out of kindness (see my preceding post about this) and I can see Voldemort crawling off to live out his days as a powerless, soulless monster, or maybe crawling off and being hunted down by a DE in search of vengeance (Draco? Lucius? Bellatrix? Oh, heck, let's make it a family picnic and throw in Narcissa for good measure; they can all kill each other, and have tea and cream cakes for afters...). From kchuplis at alltel.net Tue Jan 17 00:34:04 2006 From: kchuplis at alltel.net (Karen) Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2006 18:34:04 -0600 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Snape's loyalties and DD mistakes WAS: Re: HBP: Why I am 98.6% certain that... In-Reply-To: <00fd01c61af6$f21f1c80$14b2a8c0@rechnerchen> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146578 On Monday, January 16, 2006, at 05:45 PM, Miles wrote: > If Dumbledore just dropped a friendly note to > Harry from time to time, it would have been enough to prevent the > situation > in the MoM. > Frankly, when I finished OotP first, I was a bit angry about this, > because I > had and still have a problem to see DDs stupidness concerning Harry's > feelings to be in character. Even if DDs emotional considerations are > redirected to reason, this mistake should not have happened. > > Miles > The problem is that even dropping Harry notes would have led Harry to thinking about DD and their relationship in a good way, which was the express purpose of not letting on at all. We clearly saw the Harry was no good at hiding things in his mind. I think he can and I certainly hope we see evidence of practice in the last book, but certainly during OoTP Harry's knowing anything was dangerous. Frustrating? Yes. Totally. But really the smart thing to do. kchuplis From luckdragon64 at yahoo.ca Tue Jan 17 01:17:09 2006 From: luckdragon64 at yahoo.ca (Bee Chase) Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2006 20:17:09 -0500 (EST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Patronus characteristics (was Re: Cheating) In-Reply-To: <20060116184320.22974.qmail@web53203.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20060117011709.52009.qmail@web53309.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 146579 Ceridwen wrote: > The nagging problem for me in a Patronus being sent is, > Dumbledore is shut up in a tomb. If he's sending a Patronus, > and he's alive in there, it stirs all the ancient fears of > being buried alive. Of course, with Dumbledore, there will > always be some out, some secret passage or some way for him > to not be stuck in there with life draining away (can one > Apparate from inside a sealed tomb?). Luckdragon: But if DD were entombed & unable to get out on his own and sending off a message via his patronus would it not say "get me out of here". --------------------------------- Find your next car at Yahoo! Canada Autos [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From ceridwennight at hotmail.com Tue Jan 17 01:40:35 2006 From: ceridwennight at hotmail.com (Ceridwen) Date: Tue, 17 Jan 2006 01:40:35 -0000 Subject: Patronus characteristics (was Re: Cheating) In-Reply-To: <20060117011709.52009.qmail@web53309.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146580 Luckdragon: > But if DD were entombed & unable to get out on his own and sending off a message via his patronus would it not say "get me out of here". Ceridwen: LOL! I'm sure it would! I did mention that, with Dumbledore, there would always be an out for something like that. He wouldn't be trapped in there. But there is a more base level that doesn't see reason, where fears like being buried alive run free. Monsters under the bed, and hiding in the shadows of the tree outside, live there, too. I was more addressing the possibilities in the image of the phoenix that Harry thought he saw soaring away from the pyre. One was that Dumbledore was alive and sending off his Patronus for some reason or another. Which is what brought up the whole 'buried alive' thing. I really don't think Rowling would go there, with that being such a basic fear. Yet, when one is trying to look at all angles, one has to bring in some of the odder or scarier things. I think that there's a good chance that the phoenix Harry thought he saw might be significant in the next book. It seems too much like one of those throw-away lines that turn up later in the series. Since there's only one book left, that narrows the possibilities down. Ceridwen. From celizwh at intergate.com Tue Jan 17 01:42:00 2006 From: celizwh at intergate.com (houyhnhnm102) Date: Tue, 17 Jan 2006 01:42:00 -0000 Subject: Merlin-DD - Dumbledore LIVES ...or NOT In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146581 > > Potioncat: > > The main reason I think DD is dead, dead as we know it, is that > > I don't think JKR would kill someone in one book and have all > > the kiddies and adults wait years before finding out he's alive. > > If she was going to do that, I think she would have completed it > > in one book. ... > > > > > > > maria8162001: > > > > We have to remember also that Dumbledore can make himself > > invisible without the invisibility cloak. ...edityed... What > > if during that time he made himself invisible. > > ... Just a thought, still can't get over Dumbledore's death. I > > need to re-read all the HP books again to see where DD cast a > > spell without wand. > > bboyminn: > > When it comes to 'Dumbledore lives' theories, I can only ask one > question ...WHY? houyhnhnm: I haven't posted for awhile, but I have been thinking about Dumbledore's death recently. I have also been re-reading the books in order; I'm up to the Quidditch World Cup in Goblet of Fire. My conclusion is that Rowling's genius is to make the reader believe in plots that are as crazy as dreams. I don't think I could have predicted the action in the next book after reading the previous one, even now with the advantage of knowing what happens in all of them (so far). So, while I previously would have agreed with potioncat and bboyminn, I am now starting to wonder if the conclusion of the Harry Potter saga will not involve plot twists and turns which would seem completely illogical if we heard of them in advance, but which Rowling will make us believe in when the time comes. With respect to Dumbledore's death, I accepted the fact that Dumbledore was dead when I read HBP last summer. I do think that Snape acted, not out disloyalty, but out of necessity on the tower. I don't want to get back into all that again except to say that my strongest reason for believing that was Dumbledore's pleading. Dumbledore could not plead for his own life after all the speeches he made about death, especially when *Harry's* life was at stake. Therefore, DD's "Severus, please" had to be about something else. Or. It wasn't Dumbledore. The idea has really been growing on me. "And with the sudden agility of a much younger man, Dumbledore slid from the boulder, landed in the sea, and began to swim with a perfect breaststoke...." Then there is all of DD's stange raving after drinking the potion. All kinds of hypotheses have been proposed, none completely convincing to me, for why DD would hallucinate about being crucio'd. But if it was not Dumbledore, if it was someone who had been a DE, the ravings make more sense. The "Severus, please" takes on a whole other sense, then, if someone was strong-armed into going along with the impersonation but balked at extending the verisimitude to being AK'ed off the tower. There was time to make the switch, when Dumbledore sent Harry out to get his cloak. Well whatever ends up happening in book 7, I'm sure that, however, outrageous, readers will suspend disbelief one more time. From bartl at sprynet.com Tue Jan 17 01:48:27 2006 From: bartl at sprynet.com (Bart Lidofsky) Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2006 20:48:27 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Merlin-DD (wasRe: Cheating In-Reply-To: <20060115174950.12282.qmail@web53207.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20060115174950.12282.qmail@web53207.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <43CC4CEB.5090504@sprynet.com> No: HPFGUIDX 146582 Potioncat: > The main reason I think DD is dead, dead as we know it, is that I don't > think JKR would kill someone in one book and have all the kiddies and > adults wait years before finding out he's alive. If she was going to do > that, I think she would have completed it in one book. Of course, Black > didn't think DD would hire anyone who had ever worked for LV. So, who > knows. Bart: Although I would definitely consider the possibility that Sirius Black can be brought back. After all, his death was under rather unique circumstances, where not only did his soul go beyond the veil, but so did his body. Note I said "consider the possibilty"; I don't think it's likely that he will. Bart From ceridwennight at hotmail.com Tue Jan 17 02:06:07 2006 From: ceridwennight at hotmail.com (Ceridwen) Date: Tue, 17 Jan 2006 02:06:07 -0000 Subject: Parallels in Prophecy (long) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146583 Geoff: > By way of example, the > Oracle at Delphi in ancient times was renowned for its obfuscatory > messages. Ceridwen: Yes, white dancers and all. Geoff: > In group discussions which involve other books, the most commonly > occurring comparisons are with LOTR and the Narnia books and both of > these, as well as Macbeth, have prophecies in places. Ceridwen: There is also the one about Oedipus, which was another one where a concerned individual (the king and father of Oedipus) tries to circumvent the prophecy, which of course ensured its coming true (or did it just come true in a different way than it otherwise would have?). I was following your posts about the MacBeth prophecies. And I'll just slip my own thing in here: while the Wood couldn't move, the wood from the Wood could. I think Shakespeare was playing with language there, as a lot of writers do. But, the point is taken, too, that the prophecies we hear in HP could have more than one meaning attatched to them, and it could go line by line. We've had speculation that there is a third party not named in the prophecy (Snape and Neville have been suggested), or that 'must die at the hand of the other' might mean 'next to', not 'via'. We've already seen one Trelawney prophecy fulfilled, the one in CoS about the servant returning to his master. That was pretty straightforward (maybe because of the shortened time?), but it was misinterpreted all the same, because Harry didn't have all the information. Ceridwen. From kchuplis at alltel.net Tue Jan 17 02:12:09 2006 From: kchuplis at alltel.net (Karen) Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2006 20:12:09 -0600 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Merlin-DD - Dumbledore LIVES ...or NOT In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146584 On Monday, January 16, 2006, at 07:42 PM, houyhnhnm102 wrote: > Then there is all of DD's stange raving after drinking the potion. > All kinds of hypotheses have been proposed, none completely convincing > to me, for why DD would hallucinate about being crucio'd.? But if it > was not Dumbledore, if it was someone who had been a DE, the ravings > make more sense. > I don't know. One of the things I remember most in the ravings was him saying something like "not them, not them please take me". I can well see DD being far more worried about his students than himself. It sounded much more like DD that someone else to me. I'm also quite certain that DD has been on the receiving end of some bad curses. Grindewald remember? We just don't know enough, still, about DD's past. He is such a "zen" character that it seems to me that he must have some sufferings in his past. kchuplis From newbrigid at yahoo.com Mon Jan 16 22:25:09 2006 From: newbrigid at yahoo.com (Lia) Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2006 14:25:09 -0800 (PST) Subject: Sword is a horcrux In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20060116222509.8900.qmail@web31701.mail.mud.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 146585 Hamstermap wrote: I don't remember but should go back through but others say that when he attempted for a Hogwarts job for a 2nd time that as he left he made a motion of his hand. What if before the "interview" he had killed someone and as he left he used the horcrux "spell" or whatever it was, only nonverbally I'm just assuming, and if he did he knows it's in a safe place because all of the headmasters would protect it. So, it would be a perfect place for it. Lia says: I could be quite, quite wrong, but I somehow find it odd that Harry would've pulled the sword out of the Sorting Hat if the sword were a Horcrux. JKR stated that the Hat is not one, as it draws too much attention to itself, and thus I can't imagine the sword being connected to it in any way. Again, just my opinion here. Also, I'm wondering if a greater degree of ritual would go into the making of a Horcrux, as opposed to it happening through a nonverbal spell. --Lia, who may be full of malarkey. From kmalone1127 at yahoo.com Mon Jan 16 19:44:49 2006 From: kmalone1127 at yahoo.com (kmalone1127) Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2006 19:44:49 -0000 Subject: CHAPDISC: HBP8, Snape Victorious In-Reply-To: <002a01c61ab8$b41be730$0400a8c0@pensive> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146586 Sherry wrote: > > CHAPTER DISCUSSIONS: Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince, > Chapter 8, Snape Victorious > > > Discussion questions > > 1. This is the first mention of nonverbal spells in the book, > though it becomes important later as we know. Did it catch > you at all at this point, or did you just pass over it as you > wondered how he'd get out of this pickle? This is my first time to respond to a chapter discussion so I'll give it my best shot. #1. This ties in with my impressions of Harry's actions in general. On my first read I thought that his actions were very reckless and yet , at the same time, I have done things like that in the past. I knew he would be caught (as I was) and I rather enjoyed the interaction between Draco and Harry. Now to my point, when he tries nonverbal spells I thought that it was about time, so it does not come as a surprise when later he begins learning to cast nonverbally. It looked to me to be a desperate attempt in a hopeless situation. I have however, learned never to just 'pass over' anything in Rowling's writings. > 2. Harry despises himself for wishing there would be the sound > of panic, people wondering what had happened to him. He has > always hated his celebrity, but in this situation, it might > have helped. Later in the chapter, when he is at the Gryffindor > table and feeling embarrassed, he hopes the students will just > assume he was off doing something heroic. How do you feel about > his thoughts in this situation? Does it seem inconsistent, > practical, or natural to you? #2. I feel that it was a natural response. He does not want people to know of an embarrassing moment and hopes that people will think the best of him in their ignorance. Besides, he does not want to give Malfoy more reason to insult him in front of everyone. As much as Harry is used to being insulted, it is still not something one would want to invite. > 3. Here we see Tonks jump off a moving train. All through the > last book, OOTP, we are shown how clumsy Tonks is. She > constantly breaks things or trips over things. It becomes comic > relief throughout that book. But here we see her casually > leaping off a moving train. What did you think of this? We > learn later that Tonks has lost her metamorphmagus ability. Do > you think her ability to change her appearance could be part of > why she is clumsy? Is it possible that she isn't very well > coordinated because of her metamorphing? Will she be clumsy > again now that she has her ability back at the end of HBP? Or > is there something more sinister going on here? Is this really > Tonks? #3. I found through out the book Tonks just seemed to "be there". She showed no emotion until the end, it was as if she just didn't care. Preveously, she had a lot of things going on. Her attention was divided most of the time and that may have had a part in her clumsiness. Now, (for whatever reason) all she really has on her mind is the death of her cousin and the "business" with Lupin. That is all she is really thinking about and it makes her, in a weird way, more focused. This can tie in to her morphing, in that if the clumsiness IS related to it, then her loss of it because of depression would also make her less likely to be clumsy, if you follow me. > 4. Some have said that we didn't see enough of Harry grieving > for Sirius. What do you think of this scene, with Harry's > thoughts about Tonks and his inability to talk to her about > Sirius? Does this show his grief to you? #4. It shows to me Harry's inability to handle painful subjects. Remember the "Cho Incident". Cedric was painful subject for Harry as well as Cho and did all he could to avoid it. We all remeber the results. With Tonks, Harry thinks she is upset over Sirius (and she may well be) which is painful for him as well, and does not want to upset her even more. He just doesn't know what to say. > 5. I just noticed this when working on this chapter and > actually reading it in braille instead of hearing audio where I > can't tell how a sentence is punctuated. Snape tells Tonks that > Harry is > > "quite--ah--safe in my hands." > > Is there any implication in his words here, or is it just done > for emphasis, to add some sharpness, for Harry's benefit? Or > for Tonks? Just curious about how this was written. Any > thoughts? #5. I took this as Snape being Snape. I will not get into the debates over Snape's allegeance. I think he said it mostly for Harry, letting him know that he (Snape) is most displeased with his actions, as well as hinting at punishment to come. > 6. Later in HBP, we learn that Tonks' patronus is now a wolf, > and we're led to suspect it has changed because of her love for > Remus. But here at this point, we don't know any of that yet. > Why do you think Snape made these comments about her patronus? > He hasn't seemed to have any particular feelings one way or the > other about Tonks previously; in fact, did we ever see them > interact before? Why does he say that her patronus is weak? > What do you think about the whole significance of the changing > patronus? Does it foreshadow events yet to come, or are there > implications about Lupin in Snape's comments? #6. I'll be honest and say that I originally thought it had turned into Sirius. When we found out it is Lupin my initial thoughts on Snape's response didn't change. Snape hated Sirius and Lupin. Remember that Snape thought Lupin was in on the joke that would have killed him. Snape also prides himself on being in control of his emotions and looks down his nose at people who wear their hearts on their sleeves. When he sees Tonks' new Patronus he sees her as one of those "weak" people. Not the least that her Patronus is now in the form of one of the people he hates. > 7. We've discussed Harry's hatred of Snape over Sirius death > many times in the past, and I want to go in a different > direction with this question. Harry believes that the reason > Sirius rushed off to the ministry was because of Snape's taunts. > Whatever you think of that belief, why do you think Harry would > so easily believe that Sirius would only rush off because he was > taunted? Does Harry have difficulty believing that Sirius could > have rushed to his rescue out of love for him and a desire to > save him, as he could not save James and Lily? Does Harry have > a problem believing that people could love him enough to risk > their lives? #7. I could go on and on about this but I don't think this is the post to do it. Boiled down, my oppinion is that Harry wants to hate Snape. Deep down I think he may have accepted his responsibility for Sirius' death, but as he stated in the book, it was more satisfying to blame Snape. This ties in with his trouble handling painful subjects, he does not want to think about it and so projects his anger (perhaps of himself) onto Snape. As I said, I could go on and on, but this was my first impression. > 8. Ok, I've been dying to ask this question for months. It's > come up once or twice before with no response. Did Snape see > that Harry's face was covered in blood? He did have a lantern > with him, and when they entered the school there was a lot of > light. If he did see it, why didn't he comment or why didn't > he realize that Harry had not been late on purpose, that > something must have happened to Harry on the way? If you > believe he didn't see it, why not, how could he not see it? > With all the extra security and all that going on in the > wizarding world, why didn't he ask Harry how his face got > bloodied? Were his snarky comments to Harry on the walk up to > the castle just the usual routine, done to keep up appearances, > or does he still seriously hate him so much? #8. Tonks sent a message up to the castle for Hagrid. We don't really know how one puts a message in a Patronus or how long of a message one can send with it, or even how a Patronus delivers the message. My impression was that Tonks sent a message explaining what had happened. Snape got the message so he was not surprised to see the blood. As to his comments, Snape has never lost an oppourtunity to insult Harry and this was too good to pass up. I think that Snape genuinely dislikes Harry (for whatever reasons) and his comments reflect that. > 9. Hermione tells Harry that Hagrid was only a few minutes > late, yet Snape had said that Tonks' message to Hagrid couldn't > reach him, because Hagrid was late, and that was why, he, Snape, > had taken the message instead. Was this true? Do you think > Snape intercepted the patronus message before it could reach > its intended recipient? #9. I think that Hagrid was not there, and Snape was or was passing by and took it instead. Nothing more sinister than that. > 10. Is there any significance to the fact that Trelawney is at > the start of term feast? Is this only the second time we've > seen her at the feast? #10. I don't think that she has been at any starting feast before this, the only other time she came down was at Christmas in the third book. As we know, Trelawney is an important back story character but as to any significance, well, she is upset over Firenze and may have been there to talk to DD about him but I'm not really sure. DD could have asked her to be there as well. One can only speculate. > 11. Toward the end of this chapter, we have two different > situations with Ron, both that jumped out at me in different > ways. First in the conversation with nearly Headless Nick, was > this meant to be comic relief, or showing Ron's insensitivity? > Later, as Harry tells Ron the story of what happened on the > train, he believes Ron shows his friendship by not laughing. > Does this show anything about Ron's character, or is this just > normal for any kid his age? #11. Ron has never been the most sensitive person. I don't think he has had one conversation with Nick without insulting him (inadvertenly, I'm sure), but at the same time he is very loyal to his friends. And besides, why would Ron laugh at Harry's nose being broken? If he had, it would have been out of character and just plain mean, I think. > 12. Throughout the book, Harry asks about Dumbledore's hand, > and he is repeatedly told that he'll learn what happened later. > He never does. Will the exact details of what happened to the > hand be important later, either in what Harry has to do or in > understanding what happened on the tower? #12. This is interesting. I don't think DD told him because it meant he was dying. There is a very good theory about this at HogwartsProfessor.com. It is too long to summarize here but it is worth reading. I think he might have told Harry if circumstances had been different at the end of the book. > 13. Here is one of my favorite parts in the book, for surprise > value, Dumbledore announcing Slughorn as Potions teacher. How > did you react when you read Dumbledore's announcement of > Slughorn as potions master? Were you shocked? Did you expect > it at all? When Harry and Dumbledore were going to meet > Slughorn, did you think it was to hire him for DADA? #13. I did think that he was for DADA. It was an interesting surprise, but in retrospect makes sense. If Snape had continued as Potions Master then Harry would not have been in N.E.W.T.s Potions, which would have disqualified him for Auror. In a literary and symbolic sense Harry had to take the classes for Auror, as he is the only thing standing between Voldemort and the world. > 14. I have racked my brains and can't remember any place in the > books where it is stated as fact that Dumbledore did not trust > Snape and that is why he has never given him the DADA post > before. Is this a case of rumor and gossip becoming fact over > time? Why indeed did Dumbledore give or not give Snape the job? > Has Snape really wanted it all these years? Did you think about > the DADA curse when you heard that Snape had the position? Was > Harry correct in detecting the look of triumph on Snape's face? > He hates him so much, that every expression must be well known > to him, yet his hatred may not make him a very reliable judge of > such things. #14. This one also ties in to the theory at HogwartsProfessor.com. We don't know if Snape knew about the curse but it would stand to reason that he didn't if he really did want the job. I do think that DD did not let him have it because of the curse, Snape was too valuable to lose after only one year. As to the look of triumph on Snape, he may not have known about the curse until later that year (i.e. the argument with DD) or DD may never have told him. > 15. How do you feel about Harry's savage comment that at least > it means Snape will be gone by the end of the year? Did Harry's > comment about keeping his fingers crossed for another death > disturb you? #15. Considering the past five years Harry's assurance that Snape would be gone after this year is only logical. But I do not think he really meant it when he said that he was hoping for another death. It is just not in Harry's character to truly wish death on anyone. I took it as Harry simply stating how much he dislikes Snape. Remember when Harry first found out about the prophecy and that his life must "include, or end in, murder." He was very depressed about it. And when he used the sectumsempra curse on Malfoy he was horrified. Only at the end of the book does Harry seem to wish death for Snape. But even his comment about it being so much the worse for Snape if he met him again only implies a death for Snape, Harry never actually says he will kill him. Of course, I may be splitting hairs here I just don't think Harry has it in him to WANT to kill someone. > 16. Do you think Dumbledore's specific mentioning of not > wandering after bedtime is aimed at the trio in particular? #16. More at Harry. I think DD knows that no security is absolute and does not want Harry to risk himself. > 17. When Harry tells Ron about the things he overheard Draco > saying on the train, we see more doubt on the part of Harry's > circle about his suspicions of Draco. Why doesn't Ron believe > that Draco is up to anything? #17. Both Harry and Draco have cried wolf many times. Ron has never had any trouble believing the worst of Draco before, but one can only be wrong so many times. Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me. That kind of thing. Also, we hear about how unhealthy it is for one to have obsessive love, the same could be said about obsessive mistrust (or hate). While it turned out that Harry was right, to an extent, the fact that Harry would not let it go was probably very off-putting to his two best friends. Well, that's my two cents. Hope it wasn't too long or incoherent. - kmalone1127 From goofball44306 at yahoo.com Tue Jan 17 00:56:26 2006 From: goofball44306 at yahoo.com (Matt) Date: Tue, 17 Jan 2006 00:56:26 -0000 Subject: Spell Lights Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146587 I was re-reading ootp when I had a thought. In using stupefy and Reducto and other such hexes, curses, etc, you see a certain color. A red beam or a avada kadavra green and such. Why is it that when using these type of spells you see the light but in Charms (eg wingardium leviosa) and Transfiguration you dont see a light, it just happens. If anyone has any in-sight it'd be greatly appreciated. -Goofball From Wink45zes at aol.com Mon Jan 16 23:01:47 2006 From: Wink45zes at aol.com (Wink45zes at aol.com) Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2006 18:01:47 EST Subject: [HPforGrownups] CHAPDISC: HBP8, Snape Victorious Message-ID: <2c5.211f229.30fd7fdb@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 146588 Discussion questions 3. Here we see Tonks jump off a moving train. All through the last book, OOTP, we are shown how clumsy Tonks is. She constantly breaks things or trips over things. It becomes comic relief throughout that book. But here we see her casually leaping off a moving train. What did you think of this? Wink: This did not surprise me at all. I suspect that Tonks is quite capable in her professional duties. She had no problem with the long broom ride to number 12, even with Harry's trunk strapped to her broom. It seems that her clumsiness shows up most often when she is relaxed and enthusiastic, and is just doing normal everyday things, or on a 'fun adventure,' as with the Advance Guard collecting Harry from Privet Drive. She admits that she never quite "got" the trick of the 'householdy' spells, and she is most clumsy in the kitchen. But now with this depression I doubt she is ever relaxed enough or enthusiastic enough to get carried away into clumsiness. 5. I just noticed this when working on this chapter and actually reading it in braille instead of hearing audio where I can't tell how a sentence is punctuated. Snape tells Tonks that Harry is "quite--ah--safe in my hands." Is there any implication in his words here, or is it just done for emphasis, to add some sharpness, for Harry's benefit? Or for Tonks? Just curious about how this was written. Any thoughts? Wink: Right or wrong, Snape has some 'set in stone' opinions about Harry. One of which is that Harry always breaks any rule he can, whenever he can. I have little doubt that Snape just caught himself from saying " . . . quite under control in my hands," but didn't really want that to get reported to Dumbledore. 6. Later in HBP, we learn that Tonks' patronus is now a wolf, and we're led to suspect it has changed because of her love for Remus. But here at this point, we don't know any of that yet. Why do you think Snape made these comments about her patronus? He hasn't seemed to have any particular feelings one way or the other about Tonks previously; in fact, did we ever see them interact before? Why does he say that her patronus is weak? What do you think about the whole significance of the changing patronus? Does it foreshadow events yet to come, or are there implications about Lupin in Snape's comments? Wink: We really haven't seen Tonks and Snape interact before this scene. He must have some kind of opinion of her, after all she did her N.E.W.T.s with him as Potions Master. I guess the question is, did he recognize the new Patronus as resembling Lupin, or did he only understand it upon seeing her and using Legilemcy? Either way, he now sees the rather conflicted connection between Tonks and Lupin. While Snape has accepted having to 'work' with Lupin, he seems incapable of letting go of the past and Lupin will forever be connected with fear and the Marauders in Snape's mind. A simple tool to overcome or mask fear is to ridicule that which is feared, so Snape draws the connection from Tonks's changed, perhaps blurred, (Harry is not quite clear on just what it is) 'Lupin' patronus to weakness. This says more about Snape's need to hide/control his fear than about anything else IMO. 8. Ok, I've been dying to ask this question for months. It's come up once or twice before with no response. Did Snape see that Harry's face was covered in blood? He did have a lantern with him, and when they entered the school there was a lot of light. If he did see it, why didn't he comment or why didn't he realize that Harry had not been late on purpose, that something must have happened to Harry on the way? If you believe he didn't see it, why not, how could he not see it? With all the extra security and all that going on in the wizarding world, why didn't he ask Harry how his face got bloodied? Were his snarky comments to Harry on the walk up to the castle just the usual routine, done to keep up appearances, or does he still seriously hate him so much? Wink: I have no doubt that Snape saw the dried blood on Harry. But Harry wasn't bleeding anymore, Tonks having fixed Harry's nose, so there was no need for further fixing. If anything, Tonks should have done some clean up, but then, she's not the housewify/motherly sort. But back to Snape: I think it would have been entirely out of character for him to inquire What, How or Why. He's never cared about that, he just deals out some punishment and moves on. It's quite enough for him to know that 'Potter's gone and done it again, and at least this time it seems he got stomped for it, Well he can just stew in it.' 9. Hermione tells Harry that Hagrid was only a few minutes late, yet Snape had said that Tonks' message to Hagrid couldn't reach him, because Hagrid was late, and that was why, he, Snape, had taken the message instead. Was this true? Do you think Snape intercepted the patronus message before it could reach its intended recipient? How long do Patronuses take to arrive with a message? Did it arrive when Hagrid was not there? Did Snape intercept the message because he was supposed to protect Harry, or just to have another golden opportunity to give him a bad time? Wink: Oh dear, I must admit this is one thing that jerked me right out of the story and irritates me to no end. Back in GoF and OotP we were introduced to this idea of using a Patronus to communicate between members of the Order. How exactly? Do these forms now talk; do they carry the form of a parchment roll in their mouths? what? Then, there is the whole problem of security. A Patronus is invisible to Muggles, but perfectly visible to all wizards. A bunch of recognizable patroni flying, waddling, swimming, galloping across England and in and out of an invisible house on Grimauld place . . . well, why not put up a big sign for all wizarding eyes to see? And now we learn that a patronus is apparently sent, not to an individual, but to the place where the sender expects the other person to be, and that it can be intercepted by another wizard at that! And this is the Ultra Secure method of communication used by the Order, devised by Dumbledore? Oh please! So, do you think this is just a rather poorly thought out devise on JKR's part, or is it a devise full of weaknesses on purpose? Did Dumbledore design this type of talking patronus deliberately so that they could be intercepted and understood by any other member of the Order, perhaps to avoid hidden secrets such as the one the resulted in the death of Harry's parents and the following misplaced blame? Or is this a foreshadowing of an obvious but unthought-of security weakness to be seen later? I would really like to make this 'talking patronus' thing work, but so far it's as solid as sending a secret broomstick in the breakfast owl post. 14. I have racked my brains and can't remember any place in the books where it is stated as fact that Dumbledore did not trust Snape and that is why he has never given him the DADA post before. Is this a case of rumor and gossip becoming fact over time? Why indeed did Dumbledore give or not give Snape the job? Has Snape really wanted it all these years? Did you think about the DADA curse when you heard that Snape had the position? Was Harry correct in detecting the look of triumph on Snape's face? He hates him so much, that every expression must be well known to him, yet his hatred may not make him a very reliable judge of such things. Wink: I believe Rowling said in an interview that Dumbledore did not want to tempt Snape into returning to his Dark Arts ways by giving him the DADA position. Personally I don't pay much attention to what she says in interviews as she has contradicted the books a few too many times in them and I suspect she just doesn't think too well "on her feet in front of microphones." And even if that was part of the reasoning, it reeks of "weak cover story" to me. By the time Dumbledore hired Snape he had been replacing the DADA teacher every year for about 20 odd years. If he truly trusted Snape he would want to keep him around and safe for more than one school year. If he had any doubts, he didn't want to give Snape the excuse of the DADA "curse" for leaving after only one year. (In the position of potions master Snape would have to come up with a plausible reason for leaving, probably raising Dumbledore's suspicions.) When I read that Snape had the DADA position I was not surprised, but immediately thought of the unbreakable vow and the curse together. I think he told Dumbledore about that UV. Snape was going to be gone by the end of the school year no matter what, it was just a matter of how it played out. After so many years of replacing DADA teachers, the pickings are getting thin (why else hire someone as worthless as Lockhart?). By now Dumbledore completely trusts Snape, who wants the job and is more than capable of teaching it, and is going to be gone soon anyway. This also leaves Dumbledore the much easier task of filling the Potions position, which is only complicated by also having to be from a past member of Slytherin house so that when Snape does leave (under whatever cloud) the Head of House position will also be covered. Slughorn fills the bill as well as being a trusted old friend. I do think that Snape truly did want DADA all those years, but knew why he could not have it. We've been told (by Sirius or Lupin, I forget) that Snape arrived at Hogwarts 'up to his eyes' in the Dark Arts, which he could only have learned from his mother. While he has since learned 'Light' magic, what he learned from his mother will always hold a special place in his heart. This of course does not mean that he has not rejected Voldemort. 15. How do you feel about Harry's savage comment that at least it means Snape will be gone by the end of the year? Did Harry's comment about keeping his fingers crossed for another death disturb you? Wink: I just made the mental note that Harry was going to be learning the lesson of "beware of what you wish for, it may come true." 17. When Harry tells Ron about the things he overheard Draco saying on the train, we see more doubt on the part of Harry's circle about his suspicions of Draco. Why doesn't Ron believe that Draco is up to anything? Wink: Two things cross my mind regarding this. First, I think Ron and Hermione, for all that they want to know what is happening, have accepted the judgments, the moral code, of their elders. School children are not allowed into the Order, therefore school children are not allowed into the Death Eaters. Harry has spent his whole life struggling with, first the abusive constraints by the Dursleys, and then the overly protective constraints of the teachers and now the Order. He has himself rejected the "because I said so" rules box, and he has a better understanding that Voldemort would not be restricted by any box of moral code. Second: Just the previous spring, Ron and Hermione (among others) followed Harry into a trap where they were seriously injured and Sirius was killed. They learned the hard way not to blindly trust Harry, especially when it comes to his obsessive notions. Wink [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From luckdragon64 at yahoo.ca Tue Jan 17 02:30:43 2006 From: luckdragon64 at yahoo.ca (Bee Chase) Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2006 21:30:43 -0500 (EST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Patronus characteristics (was Re: Cheating) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20060117023043.3861.qmail@web53312.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 146589 Luckdragon: > But if DD were entombed & unable to get out on his own and sending off a message via his patronus would it not say "get me out of here". Ceridwen: LOL! I'm sure it would! I did mention that, with Dumbledore, there would always be an out for something like that. He wouldn't be trapped in there. But there is a more base level that doesn't see reason, where fears like being buried alive run free. Monsters under the bed, and hiding in the shadows of the tree outside, live there, too. I was more addressing the possibilities in the image of the phoenix that Harry thought he saw soaring away from the pyre. One was that Dumbledore was alive and sending off his Patronus for some reason or another. Which is what brought up the whole 'buried alive' thing. I really don't think Rowling would go there, with that being such a basic fear. Yet, when one is trying to look at all angles, one has to bring in some of the odder or scarier things. I think that there's a good chance that the phoenix Harry thought he saw might be significant in the next book. It seems too much like one of those throw-away lines that turn up later in the series. Since there's only one book left, that narrows the possibilities down. Luckdragon: I agree and would be very surprised if there was no significance to this event, particularly due to the Phoenix being symbolic of resurrection, immortality, and of life after death. I also wonder about the fact that DD was not seen being placed in the tomb. He was seen on the table, but according to canon the flames erupted around him and rose higher and higher obscurring the body and next we see the tomb. What a perfect opportunity to disappear! Whether DD is truly dead or in hiding, I do believe the image of the Phoenix was real and a message of some sort, be it a patronus, or just a symbol to Harry that he must carry on. --------------------------------- Find your next car at Yahoo! Canada Autos [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From montavilla47 at yahoo.com Mon Jan 16 23:59:38 2006 From: montavilla47 at yahoo.com (montavilla47) Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2006 23:59:38 -0000 Subject: Tonks as Sirius in disguise? WAS: Re: CHAPDISC: HBP8, Snape Victorious In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146590 > Sherry: > > 3. Here we see Tonks jump off a moving train. All through the > > last book, OOTP, we are shown how clumsy Tonks is. ...But here > > we see her casually leaping off a moving train. What did you think > > of this? We learn later that Tonks has lost her metamorphmagus > > ability. Do you think her ability to change her appearance could > > be part of why she is clumsy? Is it possible that she isn't very > > well coordinated because of her metamorphing? Will she be clumsy > > again now that she has her ability back at the end of HBP? Or is > > there something more sinister going on here? Is this really > > Tonks? > > SSSusan: > These are fascinating questions. I'd never thought about the > possibility that Tonks losing her metamorphmagus ability might *make* > her less clumsy and awkward. But -- okay, confession time -- as I > read, I did wonder whether this was indeed Tonks. In fact, this lack > of clumsiness and her gloominess and her changed patronus all made me > think... even though I was *never* in SAD DENIAL... that Tonks was > somehow actually Sirius! (Okay, throw rotten tomatoes at me, I can > take it -- it was just a thought that flitted into my mind as I read > this. :-)) > Montavilla: This tickles me no end. Wouldn't THAT be a twist and half on the hospital scene? Tonks, hugging Lupin fiercely and crying about how Fleur still loves Bill and why can't you love me...? And it's really Sirius! That way JKR would satisfy the Lupin/Tonks shippers AND Lupin/Sirius shippers at the same time! From bartl at sprynet.com Tue Jan 17 02:37:36 2006 From: bartl at sprynet.com (Bart Lidofsky) Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2006 21:37:36 -0500 Subject: Dumbledore's Final Escape In-Reply-To: <20060117011709.52009.qmail@web53309.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20060117011709.52009.qmail@web53309.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <43CC5870.60304@sprynet.com> No: HPFGUIDX 146591 Bee Chase wrote: > Luckdragon: But if DD were entombed & unable to get out on his own > and sending off a message via his patronus would it not say "get me > out of here". Bart: One thing that has not been thoroughly discussed is the possibility of Dumbledore coming back as a ghost. There are two reasons we have been shown for people having ghosts (there may be more): 1) A fear of going on, as with Nearly Headless Nick. 2) A reason to stay behind, as with Moaning Myrtle. We don't know (but might guess) that if someone remains as a ghost because of an overwhelming reason to stay behind, once that reason no longer exists, one can then continue on. Bart From luckdragon64 at yahoo.ca Tue Jan 17 02:52:42 2006 From: luckdragon64 at yahoo.ca (Bee Chase) Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2006 21:52:42 -0500 (EST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Dumbledore's Final Escape In-Reply-To: <43CC5870.60304@sprynet.com> Message-ID: <20060117025243.60403.qmail@web53308.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 146592 Bart: One thing that has not been thoroughly discussed is the possibility of Dumbledore coming back as a ghost. There are two reasons we have been shown for people having ghosts (there may be more): 1) A fear of going on, as with Nearly Headless Nick. 2) A reason to stay behind, as with Moaning Myrtle. We don't know (but might guess) that if someone remains as a ghost because of an overwhelming reason to stay behind, once that reason no longer exists, one can then continue on. Luckdragon: If that's the case I hope he takes Nearly Headless Nick & Peeves with him when he finally crosses over. I can't quite picture him returning as a ghost, although anything is possible. __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From kchuplis at alltel.net Tue Jan 17 03:03:48 2006 From: kchuplis at alltel.net (Karen) Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2006 21:03:48 -0600 Subject: Martin Luther Day/Dumbledore Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146593 I just saw this quote today and it was very reminiscent to me of all of Dumbledore's aphorisms and speeches to Harry: Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only Love can do that. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Tue Jan 17 03:10:48 2006 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Tue, 17 Jan 2006 03:10:48 -0000 Subject: CHAPDISC: HBP8, Snape Victorious In-Reply-To: <002a01c61ab8$b41be730$0400a8c0@pensive> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146594 CHAPTER DISCUSSIONS: Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince, Chapter 8, Snape Victorious Carol: Great summary, Sherry! You accomplished your goal of objectivity admirably. > She {Tonks] also tells him that Proudfoot, Savage and Dawlish are also posted there, and Harry remembers that Dawlish is the auror Dumbledore attacked, when Fudge tried to have him arrested the previous year. Carol: This bit of information jumped out at me when I read the chapter the first time. I don't remember hearing of Savage (who sounds like a Death Eater with that name) or Proudfoot (a descendant a thousand generations later from Old Odo Proudfoot, may he hair on his feet never fall out? Oops, wrong book). But Dawlish was with fudge, as Harry remembers, and we find out at that point that he got twelve OWLS (as did Barty Jr.). Dawlish follows DD at one point and is hexed for doing so. I can't recall whether Dawlish is one of the Aurors who stun McGonagall, but I think JKR has gone to some trouble to call him to our attention. Maybe he was deliberately planted at Hogsmeade, by Scrimgeour, the former head of the Auror Office? I don't trust him; I think we'll hear more about him. > Sherry: > She [Tonks] tells him [Harry] that Dumbledore bewitched the gates himself. She also tells him that there are anti-intruder jinxes on the walls, so he could not climb one, and that security has been tightened. Carol: Here's another detail that jumped out at me, suggesting that Snape has indeed told Dumbledore about the UV and that Draco has been assigned by LV to kill him. No such protections have been placed on Hogwarts before (aside from the Dementors) even when Harry's life was thought to be in danger. Snape mentions the extra protections again, IIRC, in "The Unbreakable Vow." I'm not sure, but I think that what Dumbledore takes for granted in the argument with Snape in the forest is that these protections will be sufficient. I think I thought the protections were for Harry's benefit when I read the chapter the first time, but that's not my impression now. Sherry: > Hermione comments that the hand looks as if it is dead. She says that there are some old curses and poisons that can't be undone. Carol: Could Hermione be more correct than she realizes here? Snape could stop the curse from killing Dumbledore, but even he couldn't cure the hand. And maybe Hermione's words foreshadow the poisoned memory potion in the cave, which has no antidote? Almost certainly this passage is a hint that Dumbledore is going to die. Does it also suggest (though Hermione can't know it) that DD's death is inevitable, either from the curse or the potion or the two in combination? Since I'm responding to the summary rather than the questions in this post, I'd like to add another little hint that I found the other day in GoF. Harry has just told DD about the connecting wands in the graveyard, which DD recognizes as the Priori Incantatem effect. "His eyes gazed into Harry's and it was almost as though an invisible beam of understanding shot between them" (Am. ed. 697). Could this passage provide further support for silent communication between two Legilimens, not a detailed message involving words and images but "an invisible beam of understanding" shooting between Snape and DD on the tower? Sorry to sneak that into a CHAPDISC post, but I didn't want to use up a whole post on it when we're only allowed three a day. Thanks gain for a fine summary, Sherry, and I'll answer the questions in another post. Carol, who'll be facing the double challenge of objectivity and conciseness when she posts her summary and questions for "The Unbreakable Vow" in April From kking0731 at gmail.com Tue Jan 17 03:32:49 2006 From: kking0731 at gmail.com (Kathy King) Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2006 22:32:49 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Merlin-DD - Dumbledore LIVES ...or NOT In-Reply-To: References: <20060115174950.12282.qmail@web53207.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146595 bboyminn: When it comes to 'Dumbledore lives' theories, I can only ask one question ...WHY? Snow: You hit on the answer a bit later in your post, to bring Voldemort out into the open. bboyminn: What literary purpose does it serve for Dumbledore to fake his own death. How does that help Harry arrive at his objective? Why would Dumbledore abandon Harry just when Harry needs him the most? More so, how and why would Dumbledore choose that particular method to fake his how death? Certainly there are easier ways. Snow: Harry knows he has a mission and with him or without him, Harry does know what the objective is. Did you ever take into consideration that Snape's spy role plays an essential part in the whole plan to vanquish Voldemort? bboyminn: The best I can come up with, though I admit it's not too shabby, is that in that moment on the top of the tower, Snape and Dumbledore agreed that there was no way out. One way or another Dumbledore was going to die, either by Draco (not likely), by a Death Eaters (very likely) or by Snape's hand. So, Dumbledore sent a quick short telepathic message to Snape that said 'fake it'. Snow: Or this was planned from the moment Snape made Dumbledore aware that the Unbreakable Vow was in place. This could be the very reason that Snape was irate at the edge of the Forest when Snape told Dumbledore that he took too much for granted. bboyminn: What I am saying here is that Snape appearing to kill Dumbledore wasn't part of some grand plan or conspiracy. It was a desperate act in a desperate moment in which all other courses of action yielded a much worse outcome. So, Snape faked the AK and Dumbledore played along. Once the ruse was set into play, circumstances dictated that everyone continue to play along. Snow: Who played along? The Order members were all devastated at the news that Snape Ak'ed Dumbledore. To make everything realistic, Dumbledore couldn't allow anyone to know, not even Harry for fear of Legilimency from Voldemort, that he is still alive. If you look at the last time (I think it was the last time) Harry questioned Dumbledore about why he trusted Snape, Dumbledore paused as if he was weighing the thought of telling Harry but thought better of it, why?because Harry never mastered Occlumency so he couldn't be trusted to know why he trusted Snape in case Harry had a confrontation with Voldemort. bboyminn: So, that explains actions in the moment, but does not explain a long term literary strategy of continuing this ruse. What could be the purpose? Could it be to draw Voldemort into the open? To hope that Voldemort will be over filled with confidence and therefore act in ways that make him more vulnerable? But is that really a good strategy? Wouldn't it be better to keep Voldemort laying low in order to give Harry time to work out the Horcruxes? Snow: This could be were Snape plays the essential role! Voldemort isn't going to go directly for Harry. Wouldn't he take down his alliance first? bboyminn: If we are going to justify Dumbledore still being alive, we have to justify it within the context of the story, and his continuing to live has to have serve some greater purpose. He can't simply live because we don't want him to die. Snow: Agreed! Haven't quite figured that part out yet but? bboyminn: So, If Dumbledore is alive, has he learned his lesson about keeping Harry in the dark, will he reveal himself right away, so Harry is aware that he can continue to draw on Dumbledore as a resource? If he continues to keep Harry in the dark, and simply lurks around in the background, that doesn't really lend much to the story. Snow: How much did it lend to the story really when it happened in OOP? Dumbledore was gone according to Umbridge but the OWL's reviewer set her straight. bboyminn: Also, if it happened in the moment as I described, the how do we explain the appearance of Dumbledore's protrait in the headmaster's office and how do we explain the Phoenix Lament. Those are a little more difficult to fake in the moment. Snow: Dumbledore's portrait never spoke and Fawkes would view a death as a death; you always morn the dead even if they are alive (in the hereafter). bboyminn: It's not that I don't want Dumbledore alive. I have fanfiction taking place in 2015 the counts on Dumbledore being alive, but independant of that, for it to be true, we have to come up with some way of justifying it in the literary context of the story, and I can't see JKR going in that direction. Just for few thoughts for whatever they are worth. Steve/bboyminn Snow: All thoughts are worthy or we wouldn't be here :) [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From stevejjen at earthlink.net Tue Jan 17 04:16:41 2006 From: stevejjen at earthlink.net (Jen Reese) Date: Tue, 17 Jan 2006 04:16:41 -0000 Subject: Snape ignoring HP blood (was: CHAPDISC: HBP8) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146596 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "cubfanbudwoman" wrote: > So, yes, I'm still saying that Snape didn't act very nicely at > all -- that he did something some of us might qualify as sadistic > (or at least mean) -- but at least, for me, this scenario made it > less *confusing* why he'd not have looked surprised or mentioned > the blood. In Pippin's scenario, Snape already *knew* about the > blood before he got to Harry and had made up his mind to ignore it > if Harry didn't bring it up. > > If Snape had no inkling of what had happened in advance of meeting > Harry at the gate, then his behavior in ignoring the blood is more > confusing to me. If he did already know what happened, then he > could keep a straight face and wouldn't have had reason to show > surprise at the presence of so much blood. Jen: This is a good catch on Sherry's part, never thought about it. Thinking about it now, it could be an even simpler scenario than Snape overhearing Draco's bragging: Tonks delivers Harry to the gates and has been with him for a long walk to get there. She doesn't advise Snape to get Harry to the hospital wing, or that he needs immediate medical attention, and she makes no mention of the blood. I would have laughed out loud if Snape had shown any concern for Potter like siphoning blood off his face when Tonks didn't even bother! So in my mind it's not supposed to be as big a deal as Snape's taunts to Harry all the way to the castle, which were brutal and uncaring. Harry was certainly more concerned about the taunts than the blood. Jen, who wants to answer more of Sherrie's excellent questions but never seems to have enough Potter time anymore. :( From actorlady2001 at yahoo.com Mon Jan 16 17:06:33 2006 From: actorlady2001 at yahoo.com (actorlady2001) Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2006 17:06:33 -0000 Subject: JK Rowling site -- Lily Evans Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146597 Many posts included a reference to _____ Evans. I checked the JK Rowling site and the trophy says Lily Evans. Is this something new to her site? "actorlady2001" From kmalone1127 at yahoo.com Tue Jan 17 04:33:53 2006 From: kmalone1127 at yahoo.com (kmalone1127) Date: Tue, 17 Jan 2006 04:33:53 -0000 Subject: CHAPDISC: HBP8, Snape Victorious -- Dumbledore's hand In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146598 > Sherry: > > 12. Throughout the book, Harry asks about Dumbledore's hand, > > and he is repeatedly told that he'll learn what happened later. > > He never does. Will the exact details of what happened to the > > hand be important later, either in what Harry has to do or in > > understanding what happened on the tower? kmalone1127 wrote: > #12. This is interesting. I don't think DD told him because it > meant he was dying. There is a very good theory about this at > HogwartsProfessor.com. It is too long to summarize here but it is > worth reading. I think he might have told Harry if circumstances > had been different at the end of the book. Just an addendum. The theory I mentioned is titled "Why Half-Blood Prince is the Best Harry Potter Novel". Again, the site is http://www.hogwartsprofessor.com/home.php . kmalone1127 From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Tue Jan 17 06:03:16 2006 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Tue, 17 Jan 2006 06:03:16 -0000 Subject: CHAPDISC: HBP8, Snape Victorious In-Reply-To: <002a01c61ab8$b41be730$0400a8c0@pensive> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146599 CHAPTER DISCUSSIONS: Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince, Chapter 8, Snape Victorious > 1. This is the first mention of nonverbal spells in the book, though it becomes important later as we know. Did it catch you at all at this point, or did you just pass over it as you wondered how he'd get out of this pickle? Carol: I did catch it because I've been paying attention to Snape's nonverbal spells for quite awhile (vanishing spilled potions, writing potions on the blackboard with a flick of a wand, and, in "Spinner's End," what I take to be an Impervius Charm with an added kick that made Wormtail squeal like the rat he is and scurry upstairs). I'm not sure what I thought when I read that particular reference, but I've thought for some time that easily casting nonverbal spells marks a person as a talented wizard. And I think now that it's a skill Harry needs to work on. (Snape thinks so, too!) > > > 2. Harry despises himself for wishing there would be the sound of panic, people wondering what had happened to him. Later in the > chapter, when he is at the Gryffindor table and feeling embarrassed, he hopes the students will just assume he was off doing something heroic. How do you feel about his thoughts in this situation? Does it seem inconsistent, practical, or natural to you? Carol: Perfectly natural. Harry wants to be liked for himself (to be "just Harry, as I think he says in SS/PS), but he's also used to being thought of as a celebrity, and he naturally wants people to be concerned that he's missing (not to mention that he desperately wants to be found). On the other hand, he's done something really stupid, and he certainly doesn't want everyone to know that he carelessly placed himself in such a humiliating position--the antithesis of a heroic victory, really. > > 3. Here we see Tonks jump off a moving train. All through the last book, OOTP, we are shown how clumsy Tonks is. But here > we see her casually leaping off a moving train. What did you think of this? We learn later that Tonks has lost her metamorphmagus ability. Do you think her ability to change her appearance could be part of why she is clumsy? Is it possible that she isn't very well coordinated because of her metamorphing? Will she be clumsy again now that she has her ability back at the end of HBP? Or is there something more sinister going on here? Is this really Tonks? Carol: I don't think there's a connection between clumsiness and metamorphing. We don't see a connection between clumsiness and animorphing, and that has to be a more difficult transition than between two human forms. Surely she'd be most comfortable in her own body. Ginny is also clumsy when she has a crush on Harry in CoS; maybe Tonks, even though she's in her early twenties, has a similar reaction to Lupin in OoP. (Maybe it's a subconscious wish to get his attention and make him notice her.) I don't know what to make of the Tonks/Lupin subplot. I was glad to see Tonks so competent, jumping from trains and finding Harry, and fixing his nose. In OoP, she seemded like a caricature. Here she at least seems human. But if it weren't for "Wotcher, Harry," she would seem like a completely different person in HBP. I don't think there's anything sinister going on here, only an attempt by JKR to set up the changed Patronus concept for Book 7 (and maybe another variation on the theme that unrequited love has debilitating effects. At least Tonks didn't turn into a Squib. > > 4. Some have said that we didn't see enough of Harry grieving for Sirius. What do you think of this scene, with Harry's thoughts about Tonks and his inability to talk to her about Sirius? Does this show his grief to you? Carol: I thought that his grief was handled realistically. He doesn't want to talk about it any more than he wanted to talk about Cedric in OoP. In both cases, he at least partially blames himself, and he hasn't been taught to express personal feelings in words. I also think that JKR dealt with Harry's still unhealed grief for Sirius in the conversation with DD in the broom shed. Any more would be overkill (I'm sorry for the word choice; I can't think of a synonym right now). I think Sirius Black's death will prove important in Book 7, but for now its chief effect is to intensify Harry's hatred of Snape so that the revelation of Snape as eavesdropper and later the AK on the tower will make the hatred seem insurmountable. (We're building to a climax here, but the climax will be followed by a denouement.) > > 5. Snape tells Tonks that Harry is "quite--ah--safe in my hands." Is there any implication in his words here, or is it just done for emphasis, to add some sharpness, for Harry's benefit? Or for Tonks? Just curious about how this was written. Any thoughts? Carol: I've been struggling to find some other word that would fit the sentence. "Safe" seems like the obvious word, so Snape's hesitation *is* very noticeable and at the same time, Snapily mysterious. I don't think he nearly revealed some sinister attention (he certainly isn't planning to Crucio or kill or kidnap Harry), so why have to search for the word "safe"? (Snape is too young to be suffering from late-middle-aged forgetfulness like me!) Maybe he almost said "secure" or "protected," but thought those words would give away his role as Harry's protector, not to Tonks, but to Harry? Good question, Sherry, and I don't have an answer. > > 6. Later in HBP, we learn that Tonks' patronus is now a wolf, and we're led to suspect it has changed because of her love for Remus. But here at this point, we don't know any of that yet. Why do you think Snape made these comments about her patronus? He hasn't seemed to have any particular feelings one way or the other about Tonks previously; in fact, did we ever see them interact before? Why does he say that her patronus is weak? What do you think about the whole significance of the changing patronus? Does it foreshadow events yet to come, or are there implications about Lupin in Snape's comments? Carol: She's one of the people who hears his report in OoP, and everyone (except Sirius Black) seems to be excited about it. But she's also one of the few who stays behind instead of leaving with him. (She'd rather be with Remus?) But, as Mariane said, it's noticeable that he calls her by her first name. IIRC, the only other people we've seen him on first-name terms with are Karkaroff and the Black sisters. But I don't think we're supposed to assume a degree of intimacy here; I agree with Mariane that he knows Tonks hates her first name and is doing it to annoy her. But why he would want to annoy another Order member is unclear; maybe it's for Harry's benefit. Tonks certainly seems surprised, which would indicate that he's not usually so obnoxious toward her. As for the comment about her Patronus being "weak," I think it's a veiled comment on Lupin and a hint to the reader that the Patronus reflects Lupin rather than Black, but aside from letting the reader know that Patronuses can change, definitely setting us up for a changed Patronus in Book 7 IMO, I don't know what the implications are. Maybe none--just Snape being nasty and a bit of foreshadowing. Or maybe Lupin *is* weak, and it's a warning. > > 7. We've discussed Harry's hatred of Snape over Sirius death many times in the past, and I want to go in a different direction with this question. Harry believes that the reason Sirius rushed off to the ministry was because of Snape's taunts. Whatever you think of that belief, why do you think Harry would so easily believe that Sirius would only rush off because he was taunted? Does Harry have difficulty believing that Sirius could have rushed to his rescue out of love for him and a desire to save him, as he could not save James and Lily? Does Harry have a problem believing that people could > love him enough to risk their lives? Carol: I think you've answered your own question. It ties in with feeling embarrassed about wanting people to panic over his safety. Harry thinks that the people who value him do so because he has a special destiny and not because of the person he would be if the events at GH had never happened. He wasn't loved by the Dursleys, and Aunt Petunia and Dudley are his blood relatives. I think that's why he cares so much about Ron. Sure, Ron feels envious on occasion and they've had some serious quarrels, but most of the time, he and Ron are just kids together, making up phony predictions for Divination and talking Quidditch. To return to Sirius Black, his godfather yet almost a stranger, Harry already felt guilty because Black had returned to England for him in GoF: he could have remained in his tropical paradise instead of living in that cave. And Harry may secretly agree with Hermione and Molly that Black sees him as James rather than himself. So lots of complicated feelings there, lots of reasons for doubting that Sirius risked his life for Harry's sake, lots of reasons for placing the blame on Snape instead. > 8. Ok, I've been dying to ask this question for months. It's come up once or twice before with no response. Did Snape see that Harry's face was covered in blood? He did have a lantern with him, and when they entered the school there was a lot of light. If he did see it, why didn't he comment or why didn't he realize that Harry had not been late on purpose, that something must have happened to Harry on the way? Were his snarky comments to Harry on the walk up to the > castle just the usual routine, done to keep up appearances, or does he still seriously hate him so much? Carol: First, I'm sure that he did see the blood and that he also noticed immediately that it was dried, that Harry's nose was uninjured, and that Harry was behaving normally (for Harry). No reason for concern that he was still hurt; Snape is always sending students to the hospital wing or ordering someone to escort them there if they need Madam Pomfrey's help. And while he may have overheard Draco as he passed the Slytherin table, I think it's more likely that he saw Draco enacting the nose-smashing incident and put two and two together as only Snape can. I think his taunts were intended to get a reaction out of Harry, to get him to defend himself and blame Draco. And if Draco had been the one with the bloody face, the tactic would have worked. But in Harry's case, the needling only made him more determined to say nothing. As for not cleaning up Harry's face, the question for me is whay Tonks didn't do it. I think Snape left it as is so that *Dumbledore* would see Harry's face and question Snape about it later. How much Snape actually deduced and whether he can actually sense Harry's thoughts without the eye contact normally required for Legilimency, I don't know. Maybe the invisibility cloak is just Snape's knowing Harry's chief method of keeping out of trouble. Maybe it's something more. But that Snape was either gathering information or trying to do so, I have no doubt. > > 9. Hermione tells Harry that Hagrid was only a few minutes late, yet Snape had said that Tonks' message to Hagrid couldn't reach him, because Hagrid was late, and that was why, he, Snape, had taken the message instead. Was this true? Do you think Snape intercepted the patronus message before it could reach its intended recipient? How long do Patronuses take to arrive with a message? Did it arrive when Hagrid was not there? Did Snape intercept the message because he was supposed to protect Harry, or just to have another golden opportunity to give him a bad time? Carol: Tonks said that she sent her Patronus to the school and expected Hagrid to receive it, but I'm sure that if she had specifically intended it for Hagrid, it would have found him. Instead, it delivered its message to the first Order member it encountered in the school, quite possibly standing where Tonks expected Hagrid to be. I don't think that Snape "intercepted" a message specifically intended for another recipient, or that he could have done so any more than Harry could intercept a Howler intended for Petunia. Owls can be intercepted, but I don't think that purely magical messages can be. So I think that Snape was telling the truth. If he also saw a "golden opportunity" to give Harry a bad time, that was a side benefit. (That's certainly Harry's interpretation and quite possibly what Snape wants Harry to think, but I think Snape wanted to find out for himself exactly what happened--and, of course, provide Harry with an escort to the school just in case there was actual danger. > > 10. Is there any significance to the fact that Trelawney is at the start of term feast? Is this only the second time we've seen her at the feast? Carol: IIRC, the only other time we've seen her at a feast was at Christmastime in PoA, at which time she was afraid to sit down because there would be thirteen people at the table. It just occurred to me that there are twelve possible OWLS, which means twelve subjects and twelve teachers at Hogwarts, with Dumbledore, the headmaster, as the thirteenth person--and the first to get up from the table (to make his speech). (I just checked at the Lexicon to verify the number of classes; it lists thirteen, but one of them is Flying, which is not an OWLS subject: http://www.hp-lexicon.org/hogwarts/classes/classes.html ). Does anyone else think that Trelawney's presence at the table is significant for this reason (unlucky thirteen)? > > 11. Toward the end of this chapter, we have two different situations with Ron, both that jumped out at me in different ways. First in the conversation with nearly Headless Nick, was this meant to be comic relief, or showing Ron's insensitivity? Later, as Harry tells Ron the story of what happened on the train, he believes Ron shows his friendship by not laughing. Does this show anything about Ron's character, or is this just normal for any kid his age? Carol: Good old Ron. Sensitivity is not a notable trait among sixteen-year-old boys, and NHN's remark really was a bit over the top. In fact, my reaction was to wonder about his sincerity. *Would* he "die" for Harry? *Does* he keep Harry's secrets? He seems a bit full of himself to me. As for Ron not laughing, of course he wouldn't, but the Slytherins had done so. Since Ron hates Draco (perhaps more than Harry does), he would never have laughed, however much he might laugh when Draco is the victim of a mixture of hexes on the Hogwarts Express. It reminds me of the time when Ron was sneaking out to practice on his broom for Quidditch and Ron thought Harry would laugh at *him.* Just boys slightly embarrassed about their particular situation and not quite sure their best mate will understand. They should stop underestimating each other. > > 12. Throughout the book, Harry asks about Dumbledore's hand, and he is repeatedly told that he'll learn what happened later. He never does. Will the exact details of what happened to the hand be important later, either in what Harry has to do or in understanding what happened on the tower? Carol: I certainly hope so. But unless Aberforth Dumbledore happened to be present when Snape stopped the curse from killing his brother Albus, the only person who knows what happened is Snape himself. Did he know it was a Horcrux? Did he only slow DD's death, not cure him? (I think we do know why he couldn't save the hand: it was an "old curse" without a cure. I suspect the potion in the cave was similar; no antidote for the poison. And, yes, anything we can learn about Dumbledore and Snape relates to the two great questions: Was DD justified in trusting Snape and what really happened on the tower? (See my previous post for new evidence of possible mental telepathy between them.) > > 13. Here is one of my favorite parts in the book, for surprise value, Dumbledore announcing Slughorn as Potions teacher. How did you react when you read Dumbledore's announcement of Slughorn as potions master? Were you shocked? Did you expect it at all? When Harry and Dumbledore were going to meet Slughorn, did you think it was to hire him for DADA? Carol: Maybe I should have expected it, but I'm so conditioned to a new and unknown DADA teacher in every book that I was as shocked as Harry. But my reaction was different from his. He didn't want Snape as DADA teacher because he didn't want to take classes with him. I didn't want him subjected to the "jinx" because, as Harry said, it meant that Snape wouldn't be at Hogwarts the next year. Good news from Harry's standpoint; bad news from mine--especially with that ominous UV Snape had just taken. I thought he was dooming himself to death by teaching the course. And maybe he was. . . . > > 14. I have racked my brains and can't remember any place in the books where it is stated as fact that Dumbledore did not trust Snape and that is why he has never given him the DADA post before. Is this a case of rumor and gossip becoming fact over time? Carol: You're right. There's no such passage. In fact, the evidence is all to the contrary: DD did trust Snape. The only thing we have is Snape's insinuation to Bellatrix that DD thought the DADA course might cause Snape to revert to his own ways. But I'm pretty sure that Snape knew perfectly well that he would be teaching the DADA course that year. He just didn't want Bella--and perhaps Voldemort--to know. Sherry: Why indeed did Dumbledore give or not give Snape the job? Has Snape really wanted it all these years? Did you think about the DADA curse when you heard that Snape had the position? Carol: Somewhere I have a whole post on this question. If the students suspected that the course was jinxed, Snape certainly did. After all, he'd been teaching at Hogwarts for fifteen years ("sixteen" in "Spinner's End" is a Flint) and he had seen what happened to all his predecessors. He even worked, in some instances, to expose their inadequacies or their evil nature. Whatever Snape may be, he's not a fool, and he would not have been unaware that the supposed jinx had sometimes deadly consequences. I imagine tht DD told him before he accepted the position that it had been cursed by Voldemort. I think DD withheld it from him all these years, even allowing Umbridge to teach rather than Snape in OoP, because he was saving Snape for an emergency. At the beginning of HBP, Snape is not only the most talented wizard available to teach DADA, he's the only one. And DD really needs his expertise in DADA and the Dark Arts, not in Potions. In the past, he has made potions, notably Veritaserum and Wolfsbane Potion, as part of his duties as Potions Master. This year, DD needs him to break curses and otherwise fight the Dark Arts. There's no one else he can count on to do this, so he needs Snape in the DADA position. (note that it was Lockhart's job, not Snape's to go after the monster in the Chamber of Secrets.) And of course, there's the matter of Slughorn, whom DD also needs at Hogwarts (though not so desperately, IMO) and who certainly can't be prevailed upon to teach DADA but can take Snape's old position (and serve as HOH when the DADA curse inevitably takes Snape's job and possibly his life). And, of course, DD needs a competent teacher in the DADA position, and Snape knows the subject in detail, just as he knows potions. We see the evidence in his detailed DADA OWL in OoP, in his gift for nonverbal spells, in his duelling skills, in his ability to invent spells. The time has come. IMO, DD has wanted Severus Snape with him all these years, kept him at his side teaching another subject at which he excels, but now, at last, he has to sacrifice him. He has to give him the DADA position. And Snape, too, knows that he has no choice. The time has come. Sherry: Was Harry correct in detecting the look of triumph on Snape's face? He hates him so much, that every expression must be well known to him, yet his hatred may not make him a very reliable judge of such things. Carol: His hatred blinds him (in my view). He is, I am certain, wholly mistaken in Snape. This look, like the look of revulsion and hatred in "The Lightning-Struck Tower," means something altogether different that Harry thinks it means. (But of course, I could be wrong.) > > 15. How do you feel about Harry's savage comment that at least it means Snape will be gone by the end of the year? Did Harry's comment about keeping his fingers crossed for another death disturb you? Carol: I hoped that he was wrong, of course, but it would have disturbed me more if Harry had a history of being right about Snape. The DADA "jinx" did disturb me, of course, more so when I learned that it was a real curse placed by LV himself. And I've been disturbed by Harry's attitude, not only toward Snape but toward dark curses and vengeance, for two books now. He has to get past those emotions and temptations or he'll turn into another Tom Riddle and there will be no chance of defeating LV through Love or a pure soul. (Kneasy, where are you?) But I also believe that "he would never forgive Snape. Never" (OoP) is a perfect example of unreliable narration waiting to be belied by the facts of the story. > > > > 17. When Harry tells Ron about the things he overheard Draco saying on the train, we see more doubt on the part of Harry's circle about his suspicions of Draco. Why doesn't Ron believe that Draco is up to anything? Carol: Their suspicions were wrong in CoS, for one. fo another, draco has always been just a schoolyard bully, trying to get Hagrid fired and passing distorted information to Rita Skeeter, but he has never seemed like a real threat. I think Ron underestimates the effect on Draco of his idolized father's arrest. Draco now has a very real grudge against Harry that goes far beyond his choosing the "wrong" side and associating with "Mudbloods" and "blood traitors." It never occurs to Ron that Draco would be sufficiently incensed, and sufficiently deluded, to actually join the Death Eaters, or that Voldemort would really find a use for a sixteen-year-old boy. Sure, Draco is a snob, a bully, a bigot, a cheater (in Quidditch), but a Death Eater? Nah, he's just a scummy kid. Or so Ron would think. > > > Sherry > Who apologizes for the length but who didn't realize how much there was in this chapter when she chose it. Thanks for letting me lead a chapter! This was so fun! Carol: It was fun answering your questions, too. And your "comeuppance" is the length of my answers! Carol, thanking Sherry for her objectivity and insight into this chapter From zgirnius at yahoo.com Tue Jan 17 05:53:36 2006 From: zgirnius at yahoo.com (zgirnius) Date: Tue, 17 Jan 2006 05:53:36 -0000 Subject: CHAPDISC: HBP8, Snape Victorious In-Reply-To: <002a01c61ab8$b41be730$0400a8c0@pensive> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146600 zgirnius: Thanks, Sherry, for a nice summary and questions! My thoughts below... >"Sherry Gomes" wrote: > Discussion questions > > 1. This is the first mention of nonverbal spells in the book, though it > becomes important later as we know. Did it catch you at all at this point, > or did you just pass over it as you wondered how he'd get out of this > pickle? I did not pay any special attention, no. But I had noticed them before (OotP, in the Dumbledore/Voldemort duel, which had a notable absence of incantations). > 2. Harry despises himself for wishing there would be the sound of panic, > people wondering what had happened to him. He has always hated his > celebrity, but in this situation, it might have helped. Later in the > chapter, when he is at the Gryffindor table and feeling embarrassed, he > hopes the students will just assume he was off doing something heroic. How > do you feel about his thoughts in this situation? Does it seem > inconsistent, practical, or natural to you? It seemed natural. (And inconsistent-people are. Harry certainly is.) > 3. Here we see Tonks jump off a moving train. All through the last book, > OOTP, we are shown how clumsy Tonks is. She constantly breaks things or > trips over things. It becomes comic relief throughout that book. But here > we see her casually leaping off a moving train. What did you think of this? > We learn later that Tonks has lost her metamorphmagus ability. Do you think > her ability to change her appearance could be part of why she is clumsy? Is > it possible that she isn't very well coordinated because of her > metamorphing? Will she be clumsy again now that she has her ability back at > the end of HBP? Or is there something more sinister going on here? Is this > really Tonks? I thought it was really Tonks. I think the idea that metamorphing mamkes her clumsy has some merit, and it her lack of clumsiness in HBP would thus be explained by the loss of her powers. But I also think her jumping off the train is not some sort of contradiction with her clumsiness. It is a very quick bit of action, and one on which she would naturally be concentrating. > 4. Some have said that we didn't see enough of Harry grieving for Sirius. > What do you think of this scene, with Harry's thoughts about Tonks and his > inability to talk to her about Sirius? Does this show his grief to you? To some extent, yes. However, I thought his hate-filled thoughts about Snape later in the chapter were even more telling and indicative of his grief. I really liked how Harry was thinking that Sirius had been powerfully influenced by Snape's remarks about remaining safely hidden, anf the narrator's explanation "Harry clung to this notion, because it enabled him ot blame Snapem which felt satisfying, and also because he knew that if anyone was not sirry that Sirius was dead, it was the man now striding next to him in the darkness". To me this showed that the death of Sirius was still very painful to him and he was making himself think of less painful things like his previously establushed hatred of Snape as a coping mechanism. > 5. I just noticed this when working on this chapter and actually reading it > in braille instead of hearing audio where I can't tell how a sentence is > punctuated. Snape tells Tonks that Harry is > > "quite--ah--safe in my hands." > > Is there any implication in his words here, or is it just done for emphasis, > to add some sharpness, for Harry's benefit? Or for Tonks? Just curious > about how this was written. Any thoughts? I noticed it, but do not have an opinion. It sounded Snapelike to me, for whatever reason. > 6. Later in HBP, we learn that Tonks' patronus is now a wolf, and we're led > to suspect it has changed because of her love for Remus. But here at this > point, we don't know any of that yet. Why do you think Snape made these > comments about her patronus? He hasn't seemed to have any particular > feelings one way or the other about Tonks previously; in fact, did we ever > see them interact before? Why does he say that her patronus is weak? What > do you think about the whole significance of the changing patronus? Does it > foreshadow events yet to come, or are there implications about Lupin in > Snape's comments? I assumed that yes, this was a negative comment about Lupin. > 7. We've discussed Harry's hatred of Snape over Sirius death many times in > the past, and I want to go in a different direction with this question. > Harry believes that the reason Sirius rushed off to the ministry was because > of Snape's taunts. Whatever you think of that belief, why do you think > Harry would so easily believe that Sirius would only rush off because he was > taunted? Does Harry have difficulty believing that Sirius could have rushed > to his rescue out of love for him and a desire to save him, as he could not > save James and Lily? Does Harry have a problem believing that people could > love him enough to risk their lives? That is an interesting observation, and I think you may have something here with Harry's feelings that people would not risk themselves for him. But I think is also has to do with grief or survivor guilt over the episode. Sirius went there to save HIM, Harry. If Harry had not been there and in danger, he would not have gone. I am not saying it was thus Harry's fault, but I do think Harry believes this, irrational though it might be. It is thus comforting for Harry to think that the real reason Sirius went was Snape's taunts. Because that has nothing to do with Harry. > 10. Is there any significance to the fact that Trelawney is at the start of > term feast? Is this only the second time we've seen her at the feast? I don't recall when we've seen her before. But we definitely saw her a lot more outside of class in HBP than in other books, and I think this was part and parcel of that. I'm not sure why, exactly, this is. Perhaps she will continue to play a role in Book 7 (does Voldemort need to learn the Prophecy at some point, so he could make another Macbeth-like blinder?). Or was her role to tell Harry Snape was the eavesdropper, and having her around more was just to make that final conversation not come out of the blue? > 11. Toward the end of this chapter, we have two different situations with > Ron, both that jumped out at me in different ways. First in the > conversation with nearly Headless Nick, was this meant to be comic relief, > or showing Ron's insensitivity? Later, as Harry tells Ron the story of what > happened on the train, he believes Ron shows his friendship by not laughing. > Does this show anything about Ron's character, or is this just normal for > any kid his age? Ron is always making jokes to the ghosts about them being dead. He does this with Myrtle as well. I think this is just his sense of humor. But he is usually an excellent best friend to Harry in my opinion and senses when humor is not the right approach to use (as in tthis case). > 12. Throughout the book, Harry asks about Dumbledore's hand, and he is > repeatedly told that he'll learn what happened later. He never does. Will > the exact details of what happened to the hand be important later, either in > what Harry has to do or in understanding what happened on the tower? They certainly could. Exactly what Snape did (or deliberately failed to do,as has been suggestedO in treating the injury might be significant. Also, if the injury was eventually fatal and Dumbledore was living on borrowed time, as others have suggested, this would come out, I imagine. > 13. Here is one of my favorite parts in the book, for surprise value, > Dumbledore announcing Slughorn as Potions teacher. How did you react when > you read Dumbledore's announcement of Slughorn as potions master? Were you > shocked? Did you expect it at all? When Harry and Dumbledore were going to > meet Slughorn, did you think it was to hire him for DADA? I did at first think it was for DADA. But first, Sluggie really did not give me DADA instructor vibes, and second, Dumbledore's comment when Harry said he would not see much of Snape anymore made me wonder. I was still surprised, but at the same time was an aha! moment. > 14. I have racked my brains and can't remember any place in the books where > it is stated as fact that Dumbledore did not trust Snape and that is why he > has never given him the DADA post before. Is this a case of rumor and > gossip becoming fact over time? Why indeed did Dumbledore give or not give > Snape the job? Has Snape really wanted it all these years? Did you think > about the DADA curse when you heard that Snape had the position? Was Harry > correct in detecting the look of triumph on Snape's face? He hates him so > much, that every expression must be well known to him, yet his hatred may > not make him a very reliable judge of such things. I too am not able to recall any point in the books where this was stated. Maybe Harry reads old JKR interviews (joke). I think Harry believes this because of his own dislike of Snape, because of what Sirius and Lupin have told him about Snape liking the Dark Arts, and because he is still influenced by the streotypical view of Slytherins. I am convinced Dumbledore did not give him the job before because he did not want to lose his presence at Hogwarts. And he knew he very well might because of the jinx. I doubt Snape really wanted the position, since the jinx has been in effect since before Snape started at Hogwarts as a student. And Snape does not strike me as someone who would fail to notice the endless turnover in the DADA position. I did immediatelt think of the jinx when I learned Snape go the position. It was definitely a sinking feeling in the pit of my stomach moment for me (much like the end of Chapter 2). Whatever expression Snape had on his face that Harry saw as triumphant was, I think, in response to the applause of the Slytherins. As to why Dumbledore gave him the job, this is a question that greatly interests me, and I have a theory. I think that in response to the war starting in earnest, Dumbledore wanted to get his Death Eater spy into position where he can do the most good for the Order. And that is NOT at Hogwarts, where he has few opportunities to interact with Voldemort and Death Eaters. But he does not want Voldemort to suspect anything, at the same time. Giving Snape DADA gets Snape out of Hogwarts where he is free to spend more time with the Death Eaters, in a way that VOldemort is not likely to suspect (since it would be due to the actions of his own jinx). I specifically do not think it makes sense to give Snape the job just in order to hire Slughorn. Dumbledore already has two Divination teachers-why not two Potions teachers? > 15. How do you feel about Harry's savage comment that at least it means > Snape will be gone by the end of the year? Did Harry's comment about > keeping his fingers crossed for another death disturb you? Yes, it did. Especially in restrospect. It illustrates that we should be very careful what we wish for... > 16. Do you think Dumbledore's specific mentioning of not wandering after > bedtime is aimed at the trio in particular? No, of course they are going to wander after bedtime...after 5 years of this he must be resigned to this fact! I think this just serves as yet another sign of the times. War, danger, etc. From eggplant107 at hotmail.com Tue Jan 17 06:58:22 2006 From: eggplant107 at hotmail.com (eggplant107) Date: Tue, 17 Jan 2006 06:58:22 -0000 Subject: BloodBath in Book 7 Was Re:Who dies in 7? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146601 "antoshachekhonte" wrote: > I still think that any ending that is the > equivalent of Dirty Harry standing over LV > with his wand pointed at his head, saying, > "Do you feel lucky, punk?"--in other words, > any ending that's simply a matter of Harry > loading up for bear and blowing Voldemort > away--is going to be unsatisfying. Well, I sort of like the idea, I'm a big fan of gratuitous violence, but if not Dirth Harry that how about Harry saying this in book 7: Voldemort I'm going to go to work on you with a pair of pliers and a blow torch. Hear me talkin' hillbilly boy?! I ain't through with you by a damn site. I'm gonna git medieval on your ass." Ok, Maybe that's going a little too far, but this is a war after all and in war good people do terrible things, even people as good as Harry. I'll tell you one thing I most certainly DO NOT want to see, Harry killing Voldemort with kindness! That would be so sweet we'd all get diabetes. Eggplant From zgirnius at yahoo.com Tue Jan 17 07:12:21 2006 From: zgirnius at yahoo.com (zgirnius) Date: Tue, 17 Jan 2006 07:12:21 -0000 Subject: Snape ignoring HP blood (was: CHAPDISC: HBP8) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146602 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "dumbledore11214" > Alla: > Draco, IMO. In any event that would mean that Harry is lying there > with broken nose and with blood possibly going down his throat. Unless > Snape knows that Harry is HEALED, whether Draco told his buds what he > did or not, is IMO irrelevant. zgirnius: I would say that if Snape saw the blood, he knew Harry was healed. It was dry blood, and it was not continuing to flow from his nose. (This was not stated in the text, but follows from the fact that Tonks had fixed it). Snape was being nasty by letting Harry walk into the Great Hall looking a complete mess-not by allowing Harry continue to suffer from any physical injury in silence. From vuurdame at xs4all.nl Tue Jan 17 11:02:50 2006 From: vuurdame at xs4all.nl (festuco) Date: Tue, 17 Jan 2006 11:02:50 -0000 Subject: Tonks' patronus & Snape ignoring HP blood (was: CHAPDISC: HBP8) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146603 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "cubfanbudwoman" wrote: > I just don't quite get where this came from... whereas when I thought > it was a dog patronus representing Sirius, it "fit" better with what > we know about Snape and Sirius. Well, Remus let James have his fun with Snape, though he -was- a prefect and could have stopped it. But that would have meant going against his friends, and Remus is weak as far as that is concerned. Snape is sure to have picked that up. Gerry From vuurdame at xs4all.nl Tue Jan 17 12:19:34 2006 From: vuurdame at xs4all.nl (festuco) Date: Tue, 17 Jan 2006 12:19:34 -0000 Subject: Draco again and Dumbledore as Phoenix In-Reply-To: <010701c61af7$c95f2d20$14b2a8c0@rechnerchen> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146604 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Miles" wrote: > Okay, I just would love to see Fawkes again, because I really liked the > scenes with him. But I do think that the guess that Fawkes will be with > Harry at some point of book 7 is not too far fetched. > Well, Harry already has Buckbeak. What I would truly love and what would be interesting in the Harry-Snape dynamics is when Fawkes would choose Severus. Assuming DDMSnape of course. Gerry From katmac at katmac.cncdsl.com Tue Jan 17 14:24:23 2006 From: katmac at katmac.cncdsl.com (lagattalucianese) Date: Tue, 17 Jan 2006 14:24:23 -0000 Subject: Patronus characteristics (was Re: Cheating) In-Reply-To: <20060117011709.52009.qmail@web53309.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146605 > > Luckdragon: > But if DD were entombed & unable to get out on his own and > sending off a message via his patronus would it not say "get me out > of here". > La Gatta Lucianese: I think more likely what Harry saw was Dumbledore, on his way to wherever he was going, sending off a Patronogram to Snape to the effect, "Stage I complete, all systems go for Stage II." From katmac at katmac.cncdsl.com Tue Jan 17 14:44:57 2006 From: katmac at katmac.cncdsl.com (lagattalucianese) Date: Tue, 17 Jan 2006 14:44:57 -0000 Subject: CHAPDISC: HBP8, Snape Victorious In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146606 > > SSSusan: > These are fascinating questions. I'd never thought about the > possibility that Tonks losing her metamorphmagus ability might *make* > her less clumsy and awkward. But -- okay, confession time -- as I > read, I did wonder whether this was indeed Tonks. In fact, this lack > of clumsiness and her gloominess and her changed patronus all made me > think... even though I was *never* in SAD DENIAL... that Tonks was > somehow actually Sirius! (Okay, throw rotten tomatoes at me, I can > take it -- it was just a thought that flitted into my mind as I read > this. :-)) > La Gatta Lucianese: And in HBP.26, when Dumbledore slides from the rock "with the sudden agility of a much younger man" and sets out for shore "with a perfect breast stroke", that's Sirius too? Oh, I like it! (Only, why wasn't he doing the dog paddle?) ;D Does that mean that it was really Sirius that Snape killed? From zarleycat at sbcglobal.net Tue Jan 17 15:04:07 2006 From: zarleycat at sbcglobal.net (kiricat4001) Date: Tue, 17 Jan 2006 15:04:07 -0000 Subject: Patronus issues (was CHAPDISC: HBP8, Snape Victorious) In-Reply-To: <2c5.211f229.30fd7fdb@aol.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146607 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Wink45zes at a... wrote: Chap. Disc. question: 9. > this true? Do you think Snape intercepted the patronus message before it > could reach its intended recipient? How long do Patronuses take to arrive > with a message? Did it arrive when Hagrid was not there? Did Snape > intercept the message because he was supposed to protect Harry, or just to > have another golden opportunity to give him a bad time? > > Wink: > Oh dear, I must admit this is one thing that jerked me right out of the story > and irritates me to no end. Back in GoF and OotP we were introduced to this > idea of using a Patronus to communicate between members of the Order. How > exactly? Do these forms now talk; do they carry the form of a parchment roll in > their mouths? what? Then, there is the whole problem of security. A Patronus > is invisible to Muggles, but perfectly visible to all wizards. A bunch of > recognizable patroni flying, waddling, swimming, galloping across England and in > and out of an invisible house on Grimauld place . . . well, why not put up a > big sign for all wizarding eyes to see? And now we learn that a patronus is > apparently sent, not to an individual, but to the place where the sender expects > the other person to be, and that it can be intercepted by another wizard at > that! And this is the Ultra Secure method of communication used by the Order, > devised by Dumbledore? Oh please! > > So, do you think this is just a rather poorly thought out devise on JKR's > part, or is it a devise full of weaknesses on purpose? Did Dumbledore design > this type of talking patronus deliberately so that they could be intercepted and > understood by any other member of the Order, perhaps to avoid hidden secrets > such as the one the resulted in the death of Harry's parents and the following > misplaced blame? Or is this a foreshadowing of an obvious but unthought-of > security weakness to be seen later? I would really like to make this 'talking > patronus' thing work, but so far it's as solid as sending a secret broomstick in > the breakfast owl post. Marianne: There certainly do seem to be some questionable areas in this whole Patronus-as-messenger thing. On the one hand, the idea that OoP members would immediately know the sender of a message is helpful because, if the message was in some sort of code, the recipient(s) would be able to better figure out what's going on because they know who the sender is. If a Patronus changes, due to emotional upheaval, which we now know they can do, then I'd assume the caster will tell the other recipients of this change. I wonder if there is some sort of additional spell on the OoP Patronuses to protect these messages from being told to someone not in the Order, sort of a magical encryption. That way, if Bellatrix intercepts a message from Arthur Weasley, it is too hopelessly garbled for her to understand. At least, I hope some sort of protection is built into this! The question of how the Patronus finds the person to whom the message is directed is still open, I think. Tonks sent her Patronus to Hagrid. Does that mean she sent it to the Great Hall, assuming that's where Hagrid was most likely to be and Snape saw it and called it over? Does it mean the Patronus will only go to one location? If that's the case, how did anyone send messages to Dumbledore once he left Hogwarts in OoP? Was he always in one location, known to all the other members of the Order? Or does the Patronus act more like an owl, and somehow find the recipient, no matter where they are, unless, of course, the Patronus is intercepted on the way? If the Patronus automatically seeks out the person to whom the message is being sent, then Tonks's Patronus message would have been traveling on a bee-line to Hagrid. Which then opens up a question as to just why Snape felt it necessary to intercept the message. And, can a person send more than one Patronus message at a time, should two people need to be informed of something, and the caster knows they are in two different places? Marianne, with more questions than answers From erikog at one.net Tue Jan 17 16:21:04 2006 From: erikog at one.net (krista7) Date: Tue, 17 Jan 2006 16:21:04 -0000 Subject: Snape ignoring HP blood (was: CHAPDISC: HBP8) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146608 Sherry writes: > > If Snape had no inkling of what had happened in advance of meeting > > Harry at the gate, then his behavior in ignoring the blood is more > > confusing to me. > > Jen: ....She doesn't advise > Snape to get Harry to the hospital wing, or that he needs immediate > medical attention, and she makes no mention of the blood. I would have > laughed out loud if Snape had shown any concern for Potter like > siphoning blood off his face when Tonks didn't even bother! Agreed, if Tonks doesn't clean up Harry, why should Snape? Even those who believe in ESESnape think he safeguards Harry, to an extent, to keep his place at Hogwarts. Snape points out in the infamous conversation with Bella and Narcissa that HP couldn't keel over dead on his watch, for what it would do to his position. He simply would not have let HP walk into the Great Hall, in front of *Dumbledore*, blood-soaked *unless* the blood wasn't really that significant/he, Snape, could not possibly be blamed. (Hermione, p. 163, sees blood on Harry but is bewildered when he asks about his nose; note, there seems to be no physical injury to Harry, requiring attention.) I also think Snape let Harry go into Hogwarts in that position as a teaching exercise. Call it what you will, but Snape lectures Harry for the two pages previous about being late, presumably wanting to make an entrance. (And disrupting people like Snape, who want to finish their pudding and not go out into the cold night to fetch a stray kid!) From Snape's lecture, you get the strong sense that he thinks Harry is a diva (divo) who deliberately pulls a stunt every year to show up late and get everybody's attention. So, like an alternate-universe Brady father, he makes Harry get precisely what Harry wanted (in Snape's interpretation), by ordering him to enter the Great Hall--alone, late, and exposed--so that everybody sees him. If Snape's interpretation of Harry's character had been correct, the experience might have been sufficiently embarrassing as to discourage any future last- minute dramatic appearances. Krista From erikog at one.net Tue Jan 17 17:08:02 2006 From: erikog at one.net (krista7) Date: Tue, 17 Jan 2006 17:08:02 -0000 Subject: CHAPDISC: HBP8, Snape Victorious In-Reply-To: <002a01c61ab8$b41be730$0400a8c0@pensive> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146609 >From Sherry's great questions: > 1. This is the first mention of nonverbal spells in the book, though it > becomes important later as we know. Did it catch you at all at this point, > or did you just pass over it as you wondered how he'd get out of this > pickle? I had a sense of "remember that for later" but was not surprised HP couldn't pull it off yet. It would have been wayyyyy too easy for him to develop, essentially, *more* super-powers just from wishing for them. > 2. Harry despises himself for wishing there would be the sound of panic, > people wondering what had happened to him. He has always hated his > celebrity, but in this situation, it might have helped. Later in the > chapter, when he is at the Gryffindor table and feeling embarrassed, he > hopes the students will just assume he was off doing something heroic. How > do you feel about his thoughts in this situation? Does it seem > inconsistent, practical, or natural to you? I'd say natural--it's nice to see Harry wrestling with celebrity but not being too much of a goody-goody to enjoy/rely on people's good vision of him. > 3. Here we see Tonks jump off a moving train. All through the last book, > OOTP, we are shown how clumsy Tonks is. She constantly breaks things or > trips over things. It becomes comic relief throughout that book. But here > we see her casually leaping off a moving train. What did you think of this? I never doubted this was Tonks. She *did* become an Auror, after all. No matter how clumsy she is in every day activity, I think she must be fairly sure-footed when the time demands it. > 4. Some have said that we didn't see enough of Harry grieving for Sirius. > What do you think of this scene, with Harry's thoughts about Tonks and his > inability to talk to her about Sirius? Does this show his grief to you? I think this does indicate his grief, but I think it also speaks to a theme woven through the whole chapter: Nobody's really talking to each other! Tonks doesn't really let Harry in on her thoughts, Harry doesn't ask her about Sirius, Harry doesn't tell Snape what happened (granted, Snape probably isn't in a mood to listen), Harry blows off his friends' interest in him and denies everything, and then, lo, all the teacher news, which is all announcements, stripped of "the real story." We don't know what happened to Dumbledore, why Snape, why Trelawney is there, etc. I think this is a major hint that Harry has not sufficiently learned how to communicate, to rely on his friends, to be ready to face Voldie and the gang. > 5. I just noticed this when working on this chapter and actually reading it > in braille instead of hearing audio where I can't tell how a sentence is > punctuated. Snape tells Tonks that Harry is > > "quite--ah--safe in my hands." > > Is there any implication in his words here, or is it just done for emphasis, > to add some sharpness, for Harry's benefit? Or for Tonks? Just curious > about how this was written. Any thoughts? This is how it was printed in the US hardback, too. My thought is that this is both JKR and Snape jerking our chains. > 6. Later in HBP, we learn that Tonks' patronus is now a wolf, and we're led > to suspect it has changed because of her love for Remus. But here at this > point, we don't know any of that yet. Why do you think Snape made these > comments about her patronus? I think Snape is against "fools who wear their hearts on their sleeves" and has very angry feelings whenever he thinks about love. (This is a more personal version of the blast-the- rose bushes behavior.) *sniffle* > 7. We've discussed Harry's hatred of Snape over Sirius death many times in > the past, and I want to go in a different direction with this question. > Harry believes that the reason Sirius rushed off to the ministry was because > of Snape's taunts. Whatever you think of that belief, why do you think > Harry would so easily believe that Sirius would only rush off because he was > taunted? Does Harry have difficulty believing that Sirius could have rushed > to his rescue out of love for him and a desire to save him, as he could not > save James and Lily? Does Harry have a problem believing that people could > love him enough to risk their lives? I think Harry is deflecting any thoughts that *he* could be responsible for Sirius' death, when he puts all the blame on Snape. By not considering the fact Sirius loved him *and* chose to do what he did willingly, Harry doesn't have to blame the dead or think, "Gee, everybody who loves me ends up getting killed. Is it me?" > 8. Ok, I've been dying to ask this question for months. It's come up once > or twice before with no response. Did Snape see that Harry's face was > covered in blood? I answered this in another post, so I'm skipping it here. > 9. Hermione tells Harry that Hagrid was only a few minutes late, yet Snape > had said that Tonks' message to Hagrid couldn't reach him, because Hagrid > was late, and that was why, he, Snape, had taken the message instead. Was > this true? I suspect it was true because Hagrid *was* running late (if not majorly late, still late) and Snape really gets nothing from escorting Harry back to the castle. (Other than a reason to get whopped upside the head by Voldie: "YOU WERE OUT IN THE DARK WITH HIM, ALONE, ON ROCKY SLOPES AND BY THE LAKE. WHY DIDN'T THE CHOSEN ONE END UP IN THE LAKE, MY SERVANT! NO COOKIES FOR YOU!") > 10. Is there any significance to the fact that Trelawney is at the start of > term feast? Is this only the second time we've seen her at the feast? Since Harry mentions it is weird, I have to assume there's significance. My bet: It has something to do with the fact Trelawney is important in this book. > 11. Toward the end of this chapter, we have two different situations with > Ron, both that jumped out at me in different ways. First in the > conversation with nearly Headless Nick, was this meant to be comic relief, > or showing Ron's insensitivity? Later, as Harry tells Ron the story of what > happened on the train, he believes Ron shows his friendship by not laughing. > Does this show anything about Ron's character, or is this just normal for > any kid his age? I think it shows Ron's character--good-hearted, if sometimes not a prince with words! > 12. Throughout the book, Harry asks about Dumbledore's hand, and he is > repeatedly told that he'll learn what happened later. He never does. Will > the exact details of what happened to the hand be important later, either in > what Harry has to do or in understanding what happened on the tower? Oh, heck, yeah! That hand is everything--it tells us what AD was up to his spare time, how he worked with Snape, and the state of AD's health during this book (is he dying before the Tower?) > 13. Here is one of my favorite parts in the book, for surprise value, > Dumbledore announcing Slughorn as Potions teacher. How did you react when > you read Dumbledore's announcement of Slughorn as potions master? Were you > shocked? Did you expect it at all? When Harry and Dumbledore were going to > meet Slughorn, did you think it was to hire him for DADA? I admit it, I was surprised. It was completely obvious in hindsight--why hire a Potions teacher for DADA, if not Snape?--but still, surprising. > 14. I have racked my brains and can't remember any place in the books where > it is stated as fact that Dumbledore did not trust Snape and that is why he > has never given him the DADA post before. Is this a case of rumor and > gossip becoming fact over time? Why indeed did Dumbledore give or not give > Snape the job? Has Snape really wanted it all these years? Did you think > about the DADA curse when you heard that Snape had the position? Was Harry > correct in detecting the look of triumph on Snape's face? He hates him so > much, that every expression must be well known to him, yet his hatred may > not make him a very reliable judge of such things. I though at the time, "Oh, *&)&&!, it's going down in this book!" And I was looking forward to more DADA classes, since I always thought Snape would be a much better teacher for those classes than the previous teachers (okay, except maybe Lupin's year, but give Snape credit for pitch- hitting for a class he hadn't prepped!) I believe AD gave SS the job in this book, btw, because the kids are old enough for his teachings to have the most amount of value. If the DA curse would only allow him to teach one year, best to utilize him near the eventual conflict, right? > 15. How do you feel about Harry's savage comment that at least it means > Snape will be gone by the end of the year? Did Harry's comment about > keeping his fingers crossed for another death disturb you? I thought so, because again, it means he's not emotionally ready to finish off Voldie. It's believable but still irritating. > 16. Do you think Dumbledore's specific mentioning of not wandering after > bedtime is aimed at the trio in particular? I think he was hinting again that there were secrets within the castle, dangerous secrets. Secrets=problems of communication theme again. > 17. When Harry tells Ron about the things he overheard Draco saying on the > train, we see more doubt on the part of Harry's circle about his suspicions > of Draco. Why doesn't Ron believe that Draco is up to anything? Since my baby nephew just toddled off with my book, I can't look up the text! I'll leave that to another person. Great questions, btw! Krista From ConstanceVigilance at gmail.com Tue Jan 17 17:51:09 2006 From: ConstanceVigilance at gmail.com (Constance Vigilance) Date: Tue, 17 Jan 2006 17:51:09 -0000 Subject: Dumbledore alive!! (spoiler) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146611 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "hamstermap" wrote: > > This might sound ridiculous but I remember reading in book four > when Mad-Eye Moody (young Barty Crouch) used the Avada Kedavra > curse on the spiders he said that an unaccomplished wizard could > not kill another wizard but would probably give them only a > nosebleed. > > > "hamstermap" > CV: Actually, even a sincere AK is survivable. If it weren't, we'd have no books to read. Dumbledore is well aware that Ancient Magic can repel an AK. There is no reason why he might not have found some type of Ancient Magic to vaccinate himself for an eventual attack by Snape or someone else. There is no doubt in my mind that Dumbledore lives. He even sent out his patronus at his own funeral. CV From prongs at marauders-map.net Tue Jan 17 18:43:08 2006 From: prongs at marauders-map.net (SilverStag) Date: Tue, 17 Jan 2006 13:43:08 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Mrs. Figg (Was: Dursleys) References: Message-ID: <003701c61b95$dcabc700$0201a8c0@betty9wiwuzem4> No: HPFGUIDX 146612 snip Mimbeltonia 13) Aberforth Dumbledore, perhaps... I don't buy muggle! or squib! Aberforth, but obviously can't disprove it. I do have an addition or two to the list. Don't forget Mr. Prentice and the neighbor that looks out the window across the street after Dung disapparates. Betty ----- Original Message ----- From: "mimbeltonia" To: Sent: Wednesday, January 11, 2006 6:23 AM Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Mrs. Figg (Was: Dursleys) > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "finwitch" > wrote: >> >> >> > Bart: >> > Let's list all the non-magical people we have met: >> > >> > 1) Filch >> > 2) Mrs. Figg >> > 3) The Dursleys >> > 4) Dr. & Mrs. Granger >> > 5) Ummmm.... uh..... hmmmmm..... >> > >> >> Finwitch: >> >> 5) Masons (Dinner guests at Dursleys in CoS) >> 6) Piers Poldiss&others of Draco's gang >> 7) Mark Evans(&Parents?) >> 8) the Railroad-staff member Harry asked about the Hogwarts Train > (who >> quite obviously had no idea...) >> 9) The someone who asked what's going on when Harry crashed the >> trolley (CoS) >> 10) The poor Muggles in QWC being oblivated by Ministry and lifted >> into air by DEs. >> 11) The postman wondering about the stamps >> 12) The Muggles met during Vernon's attempt to avoid the post for > Harry. >> >> Also - 7 of them saw Flying Car, and some Muggle saw Sirius far off >> Hogwarts... >> >> Finwitch >> > > > Mimbeltonia adds: > > 13) Aberforth Dumbledore, perhaps... > > Albus says that he is "not entirely sure Aberforth can read", and he > is not described as doing any useful magic at any point. Can he also > be a squib of sorts? I admit he has been charged of "inappropriate > magic" involving goats, but maybe this has to do with him being > ALMOST completely a squib... > > > Mimbeltonia > > > > > > > > > Before posting to any list, you MUST read the group's Admin File! > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/files/Admin_Files/HBF_Text__MUST_READ > > Please use accurate subject headings and snip unnecessary material from > posts to which you're replying! > > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > > > > > From prongs at marauders-map.net Tue Jan 17 18:50:09 2006 From: prongs at marauders-map.net (SilverStag) Date: Tue, 17 Jan 2006 13:50:09 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Mrs. Figg (Was: Dursleys) Message-ID: <004d01c61b96$d747f760$0201a8c0@betty9wiwuzem4> No: HPFGUIDX 146613 If I knew how to delete messages I'd posted, I'd do it, but here's the message I sent earlier minus the extraneous clutter I meant to cut from the first and realized only after sending that I had not. Hold your howlers, please, dear list elves. snip Mimbeltonia 13) Aberforth Dumbledore, perhaps... I don't buy muggle! or squib! Aberforth, but obviously can't disprove it. I do have an addition or two to the list. Don't forget Mr. Prentice and the neighbor that looks out the window across the street after Dung disapparates. As others have said, it doesn't seem likely that either of them will do magic, and I think Mr. Prentice has been named as just a normal muggle. Betty From bboyminn at yahoo.com Tue Jan 17 20:07:21 2006 From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Tue, 17 Jan 2006 20:07:21 -0000 Subject: Patronus issues (was ChapDisc: HBP8, Snape Victorious) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146614 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "kiricat4001" wrote: > > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Wink45zes at a... wrote: > > Chap. Disc. question: > # 9. ... > > this true? Do you think Snape intercepted the patronus > > message before it could reach its intended recipient? How > > long do Patronuses take to arrive with a message? Did it > > arrive when Hagrid was not there? ... > > > > Wink: > > Oh dear, I must admit this is one thing that jerked me right > > out of the story and irritates me to no end. Back in GoF > > and OotP we were introduced to this idea of using a Patronus > > to communicate between members of the Order. How exactly? > > Do these forms now talk; ... bboyminn: First, I think we frequently become confunded more by what we don't know than by what we do know. For example, we don't know that a Patronus has to stay visible for the whole time that it exists. We also don't know that it must travel in realtime by 'real' methods. For example, if your Patronus was a cat, how long would it take a cat to walk from Hogwarts to London to deliver a message? Either the Patronus is only good for very short distance messages, or Patronuses can fly regardless of their animal form. Either that or they can travel my magical means; something similar to Apparation. > > Wink continues: > > > > Then, there is the whole problem of security. bboyminn: Well before we get bogged down in security problems let's acknowledge security advantages. First, a Patronus has no solid form and therefore can not be harmed. Since it can not be harmed, it can not be compelled to give up it's message. It also can not be stopped by protective enchantments or solid barriers. Next, it is inherently an anti-dark arts spell, so it can't be affected by dark magic. Also, since Patronuses tend to be unique to the wizard, it is very hard to fake a message or send a false message. So, while it may have some disadvanges, it can't be denied that it does have certain very powerful advantages. > Wink continues: > > > > A Patronus is invisible to Muggles, but perfectly visible > > to all wizards. ... And now we learn that a patronus is > > apparently sent, not to an individual, but to the place > > where the sender expects the other person to be, and that > > it can be intercepted by another wizard at that! ... > > > >...edited... > > Marianne: > There certainly do seem to be some questionable areas in this > whole Patronus-as-messenger thing. On the one hand, the idea > that OoP members would immediately know the sender of a message > is helpful ...edited... > > I wonder if there is some sort of additional spell on the OoP > Patronuses to protect these messages from being told to someone not > in the Order, sort of a magical encryption. ... > bboyminn: As I pointed out, there is no way to compell a Patronus to speak, assuming it does actually speak. Since a Patronus can't be harmed it can't be coerced. As far as the message Tonks sent to Hagrid, I'm sure the message is guided by intent. Tonks could have told her Patronus to 'go to the Great Hall and get Hagrid'. It is possible there was no verbal message. It is possible that the Patronus merely intended to present itself to Hagrid and that would have been enough for him to come and investigate. It is also possible that the Patronus did not deliver a message to Snape, but Snape merely saw the Partonus and investigated sufficiently to know that Tonks was waiting at the front gate. Now if Tonks had formed an intent that said in effect 'go find Hagrid and bring him to the front gate', the Patronus might have acted differently. It might have gone to where ever Hagrid was to deliver the message. Again, not knowing Tonks specific instruction and not having direct knowledge of the Patronuses encounter with Snape, we can't really say who knew what or who said what to who. > Marianne continues: > > ...edited... > > Or does the Patronus act more like an owl, and somehow find the > recipient, no matter where they are, unless, of course, the Patronus > is intercepted on the way? If the Patronus automatically seeks out > the person to whom the message is being sent, then Tonks's Patronus > message would have been traveling on a bee-line to Hagrid. Which > then opens up a question as to just why Snape felt it necessary to > intercept the message. > > And, can a person send more than one Patronus message at a time, > should two people need to be informed of something, and the caster > knows they are in two different places? > > Marianne, with more questions than answers > bboyminn: Again, I think the Patronus is guided by the instructions of the sender. If Tonks had specifically said 'find Hagrid' then that is what the Patronus would do. If she said 'go to the Great Hall and alert Hagrid', that would be completely different. I suspect under those circumstances the Patronus would be unable to fullfil it's mandate and would simply disolve. I don't see Patronuses as highly intelligent creatures capable of logic and reasoning, and thereby capable of logicing out an alternative course of action. They do as they are told and no more. We don't know the extent of the Patronus Messenger. Maybe they do travel in realtime and are therefore only good for short distance messages. If they do not travel in realtime then logic would assume that distance is not significant barrier to them. They could near instantly deliver a message halfway around the world. I suspect that in the instance of Tonks trying to contact Hagrid or Dumbledore summoning Hagrid to the location of the Barty Sr attack, there were not messages. The mere presents of a recognisable Patronus would have cause people to come and investigate. In the case of Dumbledore's Patronus summoning Hagrid, it could have merely flown off in the direction of the trouble, and Hagrid followed in that direction. As soon as Hagrid had the direction, the Patronus's mission was accomplished and it vanished. For longer messages I suspect the Patronus speaks in the voice of the sender, but I don't see a dialog occurring. The Patronus delivers its message and once the receiver acknowledges the message, the Patronus vanishes; no return message. If the receiver wants to send a response, they do so with their own Patronus. Speaking in the voice of the sender is also a security precaution. It you received a Stag Patronus that does not speak in Harry's voice, you can be sure it is a fake. If we assume magical travel by Patronuses over long distances then we do not have to worry about them being seen. If being seen might be a problem, then the sender of the message can by the intent of the message request that the Patronus remain invisible until it arrives at the receiver's location. Part of what I'm trying to say is that give our noticable lack of information on the nature of the Patrous as a messenger, we really can't accurately speculate on how good or bad a messenger they are. I do suspect they are not used for routine messages, so Patronuses aren't constantly flying all over the place. I suspect they are used in critial situation and emergencies, and that more mundane methods are used for routine communications. I guess it is a matter of prespective and assumption, if you assume the Patronus Messenger is flawed then of course you will react accordingly. If you assume that it is a worthy messenger, then even lacking the details you will assume there is a reasonable explanation. It's a case of determining in your own mind whether the glass is half full or half empty. Just a few thoughts. Steve/bboyminn From maria8162001 at yahoo.com Tue Jan 17 15:54:44 2006 From: maria8162001 at yahoo.com (Maria Vaerewijck) Date: Tue, 17 Jan 2006 07:54:44 -0800 (PST) Subject: Fawkes (was Re: Draco again and Dumbledore as Phoenix) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20060117155444.66935.qmail@web53204.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 146615 Miles wrote: > I do think that the guess that Fawkes will be with > Harry at some point of book 7 is not too far fetched. Gerry wrote: > What I would truly love and what would be interesting > in the Harry-Snape dynamics is when Fawkes would choose > Severus. Assuming DDMSnape of course. maria8162001: If Fawkes chooses Snape then, that can only mean one thing, that Snape is loyal to Dumbledore. And again that would result to the theory again that Snape didn't kill Dumbledore or that it was their plan all along. As we read in the COS, Dumbledore told Harry, "You must have shown me true loyalty down in the chamber. Nothing but that could have called Fawkes to you." In danger or not the only reason Fawkes would choose Snape is if Snape if loyal to Dumbledore. From maria8162001 at yahoo.com Tue Jan 17 15:36:10 2006 From: maria8162001 at yahoo.com (Maria Vaerewijck) Date: Tue, 17 Jan 2006 07:36:10 -0800 (PST) Subject: Merlin-DD - Dumbledore LIVES ...or NOT In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20060117153610.39512.qmail@web53212.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 146616 Steve wrote: bboyminn: >> When it comes to 'Dumbledore lives' theories, I can only ask one question ...WHY? What literary purpose does it serve for Dumbledore to fake his own death. How does that help Harry arrive at his objective? Why would Dumbledore abandon Harry just when Harry needs him the most? More so, how and why would Dumbledore choose that particular method to fake his how death? Certainly there are easier ways. << maria8162001: I guess, Harry's objective was very clear from the beginning or rather since when he found out that Voldemort is really out to kill him. Can you suggest or do you know any other ways to fake his death that would not arouse suspicion from the members of the Order and from Voldemort and his followers? Who's better person to use in faking his death than Snape? What are the easier ways? Again without arousing suspicion. Steve: >> The best I can come up with, though I admit it's not too shabby, is that in that moment on the top of the tower, Snape and Dumbledore agreed that there was no way out. One way or another Dumbledore was going to die, either by Draco (not likely), by a Death Eaters (very likely) or by Snape's hand. So, Dumbledore sent a quick short telepathic message to Snape that said 'fake it'. << maria8162001: Maybe, maybe not. As I still believe that the phoenix Harry saw during the funeral is either Dumbledore or his patronus and there's only one person he's going to send his patronus who is not present at his funeral and I think, you can guess it too. Steve: >> What I am saying here is that Snape appearing to kill Dumbledore wasn't part of some grand plan or conspiracy. It was a desperate act in a desperate moment in which all other courses of action yielded a much worse outcome. So, Snape faked the AK and Dumbledore played along. Once the ruse was set into play, circumstances dictated that everyone continue to play along. << maria8162001: I don't think it's a grand plan that everybody knows, it's just between Snape and Dumbledore. And I guess, there's a very good reason why the other members don't know about it. I know I read it in one of the books but I am not so certain (I will look for it later), that Dumbledore told Harry that during the time when Voldemort's power was on it's peak they cannot trust anyone, not even with the members of the Order of Phoenix. Could it be, that the time has come again? But nobody play along in the ruse, everybody believes that Snape really killed Dumbledore and they are all devastated and shocked by his death and by Snape's action. Steve: >> So, that explains actions in the moment, but does not explain a long term literary strategy of continuing this ruse. What could be the purpose? Could it be to draw Voldemort into the open? To hope that Voldemort will be over filled with confidence and therefore act in ways that make him more vulnerable? But is that really a good strategy? Wouldn't it be better to keep Voldemort laying low in order to give Harry time to work out the Horcruxes? << maria8162001: There you said it, to draw Voldemort in the open and make him reckless. Believing that Dumbledore is dead he will surely be more confident in doing horrible things in the open. Who he have to fear now that Dumbledore's dead? Ministry of magic? Come on, they are the typical counterpart of muggle politicians, making loud bangs without proper results, it's all for the show with them. Steve: >> If we are going to justify Dumbledore still being alive, we have to justify it within the context of the story, and his continuing to live has to have serve some greater purpose. He can't simply live because we don't want him to die. << maria8162001: Could it be that the greater purpose of it, is that he's going to look for the horcruxes and destroy them without the people from the ministry of magic, tailing him around and always asking for his whereabouts whenever he's away from Hogwarts? To find and destroy the remaining horcruxes without disruption from anybody, especially from Voldemort, so Harry would really have the chance to vanguish Voldemort? Or do you really believe that Harry can find those remaining horcruxes alone or with the help of Ron and Hermione? Because I really can't see that Harry would be able to find all those horcruxes (except for the locket), even with the help of Hermione. Not eveybody can see or distinguish the traces of magical protection protecting the locket. And no matter how smart Hermione is, she still would not be able to detect those magical traces. Steve: >> So, If Dumbledore is alive, has he learned his lesson about keeping Harry in the dark, will he reveal himself right away, so Harry is aware that he can continue to draw on Dumbledore as a resource? If he continues to keep Harry in the dark, and simply lurks around in the background, that doesn't really lend much to the story. << maria8162001: Keeping Harry in the dark by letting him believe he's dead is very important if it can accomplish important things, like Dumbledore destroying the horcruxes. As we read in the OOTP, Voldemort can easily access Harry thoughts. What if now that Dumbledore's dead Voldemort would access Harry's thoughts again and see that there are very important things in Harry's thoughts now that Voldemort never knew before, like Harry knows about the horcruxes and plans to destroy them. And that the person who predicted the prophecy is in Hogwarts. I guess it would be in book 7 that Voldemort would go after Prof. Trelawney first before he'll go after Harry to kill him. Voldemort wanted to know the context of the prophecy and what better way to find out now than to go and get Prof. Trelawney. Steve: >> Also, if it happened in the moment as I described, the how do we explain the appearance of Dumbledore's protrait in the headmaster's office and how do we explain the Phoenix Lament. Those are a little more difficult to fake in the moment. << maria8162001: We do not know about his portait in the headmaster's office. Did somebody or Prof. McGonagall put it there, or did it just appear there magically? As to phoenix lament, I read about a phoenix song, it says, "Phoenix song is magical; it is reputed to increase the courage of the pure of heart and strikes fear into the hearts of the impure." And that is what Fawkes was doing, to ease their pain, heal them and give them courage. Steve: >> It's not that I don't want Dumbledore alive. I have fanfiction taking place in 2015 the counts on Dumbledore being alive, but independant of that, for it to be true, we have to come up with some way of justifying it in the literary context of the story, and I can't see JKR going in that direction. << maria8162001: Maybe we can't see JKR going in that direction as she didn't want to give us direct answer till the book 7 come out. But, I guess, I read it somewhere in one of her interviews that we will learn more about Dumbledore or about what happen in book 7. I'm certain it would not be in the epilogues section of the book. It's a very good thought and I'm sure you'll hear a lot about it from other members. From maria8162001 at yahoo.com Tue Jan 17 17:21:51 2006 From: maria8162001 at yahoo.com (Maria Vaerewijck) Date: Tue, 17 Jan 2006 09:21:51 -0800 (PST) Subject: Blood Bath in Book 7 / Mrs. Figg (was Re: Squibs have genes to do magic?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20060117172151.86073.qmail@web53213.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 146617 SV wrote: > And Mrs. Figg's house smells like cabbage, the same smell > Harry notices at the potion shop in Diagon Alley. Andie: > Poly-juice potion also smells like cabbage. She may keep a > vat around for some purpose. She wouldn't have to drink it > when she would be home alone, only when others are around or > she is going out. maria8162001: If Mrs. Figg is taking Poly-juice potion, then I'll go back to my theory that maybe Mrs. Figg is somebody related to Snape and needed to hide, so Dumbledore gave her new looks and identity. And maybe that is why DD trusted Snape so much. She's a member of the OOP, by the way. La Gatta Lucianese: >> And statistics are boring. It's an inconvenient habit of people that they are much more interesting when they are alive. When they are presumed dead, they are only interesting if we can debate endlessly over whether they are REALLY dead, and whether the person who killed them REALLY killed them, and if he did, does that make him ESE! or OFH! or DDM!... ;D I am with you; I think Book 7 will be concerned with the doings of HRH and other members of DA hunting down and destroying horcruxes, interspersed, perhaps, with tense scenes in the DE camp, with baddies offing one another over differences sparked by a certain Dark Wizard who REALLY isn't (might we have gotten a foretaste of that in "Spinner's End"?)> Seriously, I can see Harry killing Voldemort out of kindness (see my preceding post about this) and I can see Voldemort crawling off to live out his days as a powerless, soulless monster, or maybe crawling off and being hunted down by a DE in search of vengeance (Draco? Lucius? Bellatrix? Oh, heck, let's make it a family picnic and throw in Narcissa for good measure; they can all kill each other, and have tea and cream cakes for afters...). <<< maria8162001: These debates are becoming good....hilarious... First Tonks is maybe Sirius. The scene of Tonks and Lupin in the hospital, Tonks telling Lupin she really loves him and it turns out she is actually Sirius....can't stop myself from rolling and now this :) .... Come on guys keep this hilarious debate coming we all need them till JKR is finished with book 7 or else we'll all be a nutter if we're too serious. Kudos to you La Gatta Lucianese and to Montavilla as well. From babyhrndz at yahoo.com Tue Jan 17 19:24:52 2006 From: babyhrndz at yahoo.com (Amanda Shoffner) Date: Tue, 17 Jan 2006 11:24:52 -0800 (PST) Subject: Dumbledore entombed (Re: Patronus characteristics) In-Reply-To: <20060117011709.52009.qmail@web53309.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20060117192452.250.qmail@web30804.mail.mud.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 146618 Ceridwen wrote: > The nagging problem for me in a Patronus being sent is, > Dumbledore is shut up in a tomb. If he's sending a Patronus, > and he's alive in there, it stirs all the ancient fears of > being buried alive. Of course, with Dumbledore, there will > always be some out, some secret passage or some way for him > to not be stuck in there with life draining away (can one > Apparate from inside a sealed tomb?). Amanda: IMO, DD being the kind of guy he is would think of it as an opportunity to take a nap and think of his next move. He always looks at the positive side of things and that is what separates him most from LV. ~Amanda From kelleyaynn at yahoo.com Tue Jan 17 21:22:29 2006 From: kelleyaynn at yahoo.com (kelleyaynn) Date: Tue, 17 Jan 2006 21:22:29 -0000 Subject: Dumbledore's Final Escape In-Reply-To: <20060117025243.60403.qmail@web53308.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146619 > Luckdragon: > If that's the case I hope he takes Nearly Headless Nick & Peeves with him when he finally crosses over. > Kelleyaynn: Peeves is a poltergeist, not a ghost. We don't even know if he was ever a living person (poltergeists do not need to be). So I don't know if Peeve's could ever cross over. From ceridwennight at hotmail.com Tue Jan 17 21:27:39 2006 From: ceridwennight at hotmail.com (Ceridwen) Date: Tue, 17 Jan 2006 21:27:39 -0000 Subject: CHAPDISC: HBP8, Snape Victorious In-Reply-To: <002a01c61ab8$b41be730$0400a8c0@pensive> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146620 Sherry, CHAPTER DISCUSSIONS: Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince, Chapter 8, Discussion questions > 1. This is the first mention of nonverbal spells in the book, though it > becomes important later as we know. Did it catch you at all at this point, > or did you just pass over it as you wondered how he'd get out of this > pickle? Ceridwen: I just thought Harry was trying for something over his head. > 2. Harry despises himself for wishing there would be the sound of panic, > people wondering what had happened to him. He has always hated his > celebrity, but in this situation, it might have helped. Later in the > chapter, when he is at the Gryffindor table and feeling embarrassed, he > hopes the students will just assume he was off doing something heroic. How > do you feel about his thoughts in this situation? Does it seem > inconsistent, practical, or natural to you? Ceridwen: It seems consistent with a boy of his age. He doesn't want to ride the train all the way back to London, so he hopes someone will find him, and he'll even accept someone finding him with it being due to his celebrity. Once he isn't going to London after all, he doesn't want anyone to know that he did something foolish. Danger is past, now he has the luxury of worrying about his reputation. > 3. Here we see Tonks jump off a moving train. All through the last book, > OOTP, we are shown how clumsy Tonks is. She constantly breaks things or > trips over things. It becomes comic relief throughout that book. But here > we see her casually leaping off a moving train. What did you think of this? > We learn later that Tonks has lost her metamorphmagus ability. Do you think > her ability to change her appearance could be part of why she is clumsy? Is > it possible that she isn't very well coordinated because of her > metamorphing? Will she be clumsy again now that she has her ability back at > the end of HBP? Or is there something more sinister going on here? Is this > really Tonks? Ceridwen: I didn't think anything about it at this point, I was in a hurry to finish the book. *g* When I did think about it later, my first thought was that she's an Auror, and would of course need to be able to do physical things like this. I did put myself in that place and wonder that she could do it so well. But it had nothing to do with her having been a klutz until someone else mentioned it. After that, though, and seeing her other appearances before I finished reading, I did wonder if this might not be Tonks after all. I'm still up in the air about some of the appearances. > 4. Some have said that we didn't see enough of Harry grieving for Sirius. > What do you think of this scene, with Harry's thoughts about Tonks and his > inability to talk to her about Sirius? Does this show his grief to you? Ceridwen: Yes. Grief is a very personal thing. Sometimes, it's hard to talk about it, even to people you're close to. Harry also has other issues, like his guilt over thinking that perhaps it was only on his account that Sirius came to the MoM and died. I don't think he would say anything to Tonks until he had the rest of his feelings sorted out so he could focus only on the grieving. Also, re-reading to answer, it seems that Tonks is different, more of a stranger, as Harry is comparing her to the way he remembered her from the year before. She may have been too much of a 'stranger' in that way for him to open up to her. > 5. I just noticed this when working on this chapter and actually reading it > in braille instead of hearing audio where I can't tell how a sentence is > punctuated. Snape tells Tonks that Harry is > > "quite--ah--safe in my hands." > > Is there any implication in his words here, or is it just done for emphasis, > to add some sharpness, for Harry's benefit? Or for Tonks? Just curious > about how this was written. Any thoughts? Ceridwen: I had to go back and read this particular exchange again, since I didn't pay much attention to it when reading it before. Snape has just made a remark about Harry not having his robes. Harry begins to answer, but Snape cuts him off with the whole of this quote. He could have been distracted by what Harry was saying, though I don't know why JKR would write it that way if that's the only implication. Snape may have been about to make a disparaging remark about Saint Potter thinking he was more than capable of looking after himself. And, Snape also refers to Tonks as Nymphadora here, which I thought was odd from the first time I read it. Tonks would have been Snape's student, and he probably called her 'Miss Tonks' for seven years. Why the familiarity? It just didn't jibe with Snape's character for me. > 6. Later in HBP, we learn that Tonks' patronus is now a wolf, and we're led > to suspect it has changed because of her love for Remus. But here at this > point, we don't know any of that yet. Why do you think Snape made these > comments about her patronus? He hasn't seemed to have any particular > feelings one way or the other about Tonks previously; in fact, did we ever > see them interact before? Why does he say that her patronus is weak? What > do you think about the whole significance of the changing patronus? Does it > foreshadow events yet to come, or are there implications about Lupin in > Snape's comments? Ceridwen: On first reading, this is where I really started to wonder if this was Tonks at all, or someone else. Patronuses don't change. My first inclination was that this was Narcissa trying to keep an eye on Draco, and Snape was letting her know that he knew it was her because of her Patronus. But, how would she know how to send one? She isn't in the Order. I think I got into the 'what does Rowling mean???' much earlier in HBP! If it really was Tonks, then Harry had already seen it, 'an immense, silvery four-legged creature' (pg. 158 Scholastic), a fairly nondescript thing. Maybe the Patronus itself looked weak, neither fish nor fowl as the old saying goes. > 7. We've discussed Harry's hatred of Snape over Sirius death many times in > the past, and I want to go in a different direction with this question. > Harry believes that the reason Sirius rushed off to the ministry was because > of Snape's taunts. Whatever you think of that belief, why do you think > Harry would so easily believe that Sirius would only rush off because he was > taunted? Does Harry have difficulty believing that Sirius could have rushed > to his rescue out of love for him and a desire to save him, as he could not > save James and Lily? Does Harry have a problem believing that people could > love him enough to risk their lives? Ceridwen: I think if Harry acknowledges to himself that Sirius did go to the MoM on Harry's account, the guilt would be overwhelming. 'He died to save me', 'I put him in danger and he died'. It's easier to blame, and it's one of the stages of grief to blame. Harry is working through his grief. > 8. Ok, I've been dying to ask this question for months. It's come up once > or twice before with no response. Did Snape see that Harry's face was > covered in blood? He did have a lantern with him, and when they entered the > school there was a lot of light. If he did see it, why didn't he comment or > why didn't he realize that Harry had not been late on purpose, that > something must have happened to Harry on the way? If you believe he didn't > see it, why not, how could he not see it? With all the extra security and > all that going on in the wizarding world, why didn't he ask Harry how his > face got bloodied? Were his snarky comments to Harry on the walk up to the > castle just the usual routine, done to keep up appearances, or does he still > seriously hate him so much? Ceridwen: I think the snarky comments are because Snape is angry, for whatever reason. He might have worried that Harry wasn't with his friends, he might have been upset that he had to miss part of his dinner. I'm probably missing some possibilities. As for noticing the blood, lantern light held low doesn't show everything. Harry doesn't recognize Snape until he is ten feet away. Then he sees an 'uplit hooked nose and long, black, greasy hair' (pg 160). There is no mention of expression, or of any other features. By the time they reach the castle and the lights, it would be very late, they would already be inside, and only by becoming OOC would I believe Snape siphoning off the blood. His mission is ended, Harry's safe in the castle, now Snape might be able to finish what's left of his dinner. This is also where the thought about the Invisibility Cloak comes in. They are already in view of the Great Hall (could you imagine being a student and looking up to see Snape cleaning Harry's face?), and Snape makes the comment that Harry has to go in without his cloak for his grand entrance. Harry immediatly walks away and goes to the Gryffindor table. Also, as others have said, if Harry was hurt, Tonks would have told Snape to take him to the hospital wing. She says nothing. Nor did she clean him, either. Everyone gets to see Harry with dried blood on his face, just before dessert. > 9. Hermione tells Harry that Hagrid was only a few minutes late, yet Snape > had said that Tonks' message to Hagrid couldn't reach him, because Hagrid > was late, and that was why, he, Snape, had taken the message instead. Was > this true? Do you think Snape intercepted the patronus message before it > could reach its intended recipient? How long do Patronuses take to arrive > with a message? Did it arrive when Hagrid was not there? Did Snape > intercept the message because he was supposed to protect Harry, or just to > have another golden opportunity to give him a bad time? Ceridwen: It's possbile that the Patronus arrived before Hagrid did. Tonks said she sent word to the castle that Harry was safe so they wouldn't worry. She tells Snape that she meant for Hagrid to get the message, but she may not have specified, thinking that Hagrid would be the logical one to get it due to his duties with the first-years. What she meant and what she instructed her Patronus may be two different things. And she only said she was sending it to the castle when Harry asked, not to Hagrid. > 10. Is there any significance to the fact that Trelawney is at the start of > term feast? Is this only the second time we've seen her at the feast? Ceridwen: I think this is only the second time we see her at the feast. It might be an indication that things are different, that there is safety in numbers with the war officially on, or that Dumbledore wants her to be there for her own safety (in numbers). Or it could be something else that we don't know yet. When I read it, I thought it was a comment on the state of the WW. > 11. Toward the end of this chapter, we have two different situations with > Ron, both that jumped out at me in different ways. First in the > conversation with nearly Headless Nick, was this meant to be comic relief, > or showing Ron's insensitivity? Later, as Harry tells Ron the story of what > happened on the train, he believes Ron shows his friendship by not laughing. > Does this show anything about Ron's character, or is this just normal for > any kid his age? Ceridwen: He was a bit smart-mouthed, like any kid his age, with NHN. It was a reasonable observation to make, just not to the person it's about, unless you want to be antagonistic, or if you just didn't think. And, I don't think Ron would laugh at Harry's story, since they're friends. That would remove any comic elements in it for Ron, I think. > 12. Throughout the book, Harry asks about Dumbledore's hand, and he is > repeatedly told that he'll learn what happened later. He never does. Will > the exact details of what happened to the hand be important later, either in > what Harry has to do or in understanding what happened on the tower? Ceridwen: If JKR avoids writing it, there must be some future significance that will give plot points away, IMO. Within the plot, I don't think Dumbledore ever got to the exposition point in order to answer this. Harry was not sufficiently versed in Horcruxes, he was still absorbing his mission and learning about it. My feeling was that Dumbledore might have told him after they faced the Horcrux Cave, if the scene on the Tower hadn't happened just then. Harry would have had a better understanding of the protections in place around the Horcruxes (and so would we), so the explanation would make more sense. Just to go off onto a later chapter, I do wonder if (we and) Harry would have learned about it if he had been able to get Slughorn's memory sooner. And for the hand being important, I think it will be important for both what Harry will have to face, coupled with his experiences at the cave, and in understanding what happened not only on the tower but what we didn't see through the rest of the book. > 13. Here is one of my favorite parts in the book, for surprise value, > Dumbledore announcing Slughorn as Potions teacher. How did you react when > you read Dumbledore's announcement of Slughorn as potions master? Were you > shocked? Did you expect it at all? When Harry and Dumbledore were going to > meet Slughorn, did you think it was to hire him for DADA? Ceridwen: Completely shocked. I thought he would be the DADA teacher. He was shown to have some prowess in camoflage defense, with his elaborate ruse to make it look like he was already a gonner. A new use of Dragon's Blood, turning himself into an armchair, and the somewhat scholarly discussion about the lack of the Dark Mark, along with knowing that the DADA position was vacant, all made me think that Potions Master Slughorn was slated for Defense. > 14. I have racked my brains and can't remember any place in the books where > it is stated as fact that Dumbledore did not trust Snape and that is why he > has never given him the DADA post before. Is this a case of rumor and > gossip becoming fact over time? Why indeed did Dumbledore give or not give > Snape the job? Has Snape really wanted it all these years? Did you think > about the DADA curse when you heard that Snape had the position? Was Harry > correct in detecting the look of triumph on Snape's face? He hates him so > much, that every expression must be well known to him, yet his hatred may > not make him a very reliable judge of such things. Ceridwen: I think the quote is from a JKRowling interview, not from the books. All through the books, Dumbledore says he trusts Snape. Harry is the one who doesn't trust him. a) I think Dumbledore gave Snape the job because this was his last year teaching at Hogwarts. Might as well give it to him. b) I'm not convinced that Snape wanted the position so much, I think it was obvious to him that every single DADA teacher leaves by the end of the year so there must be a curse on it, if Dumbledore hadn't told him at some point. But I do think he likes the subject, and he seems to me like a competent teacher, unlike a few we've witnessed. Too bad we didn't see more of his classes! Maybe that means that overall, Harry thought he was decent enough, or at least better than some. c) Yes, I thought about it immediately, and about the interviews before the book came out saying that someone would die. I was leaning slightly more toward Dumbledore, with Snape a close second, until this point. Then they were neck and neck. d) I don't think Harry got the look right at all. I think Snape might have wanted to look blase about it, but at the same time wanted to smile. Might make for an interesting look on Snape! And, I doubt if this particular expression would be too well-known, because it probably wasn't used very much. And yes, Harry might have attributed wrongly because of his hatred. > > 15. How do you feel about Harry's savage comment that at least it means > Snape will be gone by the end of the year? Did Harry's comment about > keeping his fingers crossed for another death disturb you? Ceridwen: Yes, it did disturb me. I'm superstitious in that way, words have meaning. I don't actually believe in words causing the wish (but in the Potterverse, they do sometimes, it's called 'spells'). But I do think that words like this, spoken in anger, could come back to bother someone later on if the event occurs. > 16. Do you think Dumbledore's specific mentioning of not wandering after > bedtime is aimed at the trio in particular? Ceridwen: I think it was a general announcement meant to be taken to heart by all the students, including the trio and Draco. > 17. When Harry tells Ron about the things he overheard Draco saying on the > train, we see more doubt on the part of Harry's circle about his suspicions > of Draco. Why doesn't Ron believe that Draco is up to anything? Ceridwen: Harry's been wrong before. Most recently in believing that Sirius was being held at the MoM. He was also CAPSLOCK!Harry through the last year, not someone who seemed to have a cool head on his shoulders. He's loyal, he's intense, but he does get things wrong. And I think Ron, and McGonagall, and everyone else Harry talks to, takes his suspicions with a grain of salt. > Sherry > Who apologizes for the length but who didn't realize how much there was in > this chapter when she chose it. Thanks for letting me lead a chapter! This > was so fun! Ceridwen: Thanks for an interesting discussion that had me pulling the book out once again for reference! Good questions! Ceridwen. From indiasjones at msn.com Tue Jan 17 21:57:08 2006 From: indiasjones at msn.com (india jones) Date: Tue, 17 Jan 2006 21:57:08 -0000 Subject: Questions about Sorcerer's Stone Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146621 In Sorcerer's Stone it says that the Bloody Barons' robes are spotted w/ silver blood, I was wondering is this unicorn blood or does the blood simply appear that color because he is a ghost? Sir Nick is shown in color and I am wondering why the blood appears silver and not some kind of red? And the goblin uniforms at Gringott's are scarlet and gold, is there a connection between them and Gryffindor? Nikki From horridporrid03 at yahoo.com Tue Jan 17 22:43:38 2006 From: horridporrid03 at yahoo.com (horridporrid03) Date: Tue, 17 Jan 2006 22:43:38 -0000 Subject: CHAPDISC: HBP8, Snape Victorious In-Reply-To: <002a01c61ab8$b41be730$0400a8c0@pensive> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146622 > >>Sherry: > CHAPTER DISCUSSIONS: Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince, > Chapter 8, Snape Victorious > > Discussion questions > > 1. This is the first mention of nonverbal spells in the book, > though it becomes important later as we know. Did it catch you at > all at this point, or did you just pass over it as you wondered > how he'd get out of this pickle? Betsy Hp: I recall being a bit surprised that Harry couldn't manage a nonverbal. After all, he'd done a bit of wandless magic in OotP while under duress. I didn't think much beyond that, though I was a bit frustrated with Harry that he never managed to pick the skill up during the year. I think it'll be a bit like his block on the Accio in GoF, and he'll have to really knuckle down and force himself to learn it. > 2. Harry despises himself for wishing there would be the sound of > panic, people wondering what had happened to him. He has always > hated his celebrity, but in this situation, it might have helped. > Later in the chapter, when he is at the Gryffindor table and > feeling embarrassed, he hopes the students will just assume he was > off doing something heroic. How do you feel about his thoughts in > this situation? Does it seem inconsistent, practical, or natural > to you? Betsy Hp: It seemed quite natural to me. I think JKR has handled this aspect of Harry's life quite well, in the way his view of his celebrity has matured over the books. It goes towards how naturally she's had all of her main kids grow up through the series. Which leads us too.... > 3. Here we see Tonks jump off a moving train. > > Or is there something more sinister going on here? Is this > really Tonks? Betsy Hp: I have *no* idea what's going on with Tonks. Either there's another shoe waiting to drop or JKR handled the character pretty badly, IMO. Nothing about Tonks' state said "lovelorn" to me. So the explanation at the end of HBP struck a very discordant note for me. I mean, maybe that's the whole story and JKR just phoned this particular redherring in, or (and here's hoping) there's more to this than is revealed in HBP. > 4. Some have said that we didn't see enough of Harry grieving for > Sirius. What do you think of this scene, with Harry's thoughts > about Tonks and his inability to talk to her about Sirius? Does > this show his grief to you? Betsy Hp: I think JKR's done a bangup job showing a grieving Harry. This particular scene was just one of the ways she showed Harry's struggle to deal with Sirius's death. The scene with Mundungas was another one that really struck me. > 5. I just noticed this when working on this chapter and actually > reading it in braille instead of hearing audio where I can't tell > how a sentence is punctuated. Snape tells Tonks that Harry is > "quite--ah--safe in my hands." > Is there any implication in his words here, or is it just done for > emphasis, to add some sharpness, for Harry's benefit? Or for > Tonks? Just curious about how this was written. Any thoughts? Betsy Hp: Just Snape being Snape, to my mind. After all, Snape is probably well aware that Harry would have prefered an escort from Voldemort himself than to have to endure Snape's company. So Harry will not be happy. I read Snape as somewhat amused. (Heck, I was chortling myself. ) > 6. Later in HBP, we learn that Tonks' patronus is now a wolf, and > we're led to suspect it has changed because of her love for > Remus. > > Why do you think Snape made these comments about her patronus? > > What do you think about the whole significance of the changing > patronus? Does it foreshadow events yet to come, or are there > implications about Lupin in Snape's comments? Betsy Hp: To answer the last question first: Yes, I think there's foreshadowing here. I suspect Snape's patronus may well change due to his own emotional hit and this will lead Harry to trust the messages that patronus brings. Or something like that. To the other question, I wanted to respond to Alla and SSSusan here: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/146559 > >>Alla: > > As to Snape's comments per se, I think that was another dig > > at poor Remus, although have no idea why he would call Remus > > weak. Because Remus cannot hold a job and ill once a month? > >>SSSusan: > > So why the "weak" remark NOW? Why insult Remus NOW? Why say > something so mean to Tonks? > > I just don't quite get where this came from... whereas when I > thought it was a dog patronus representing Sirius, it "fit" better > with what we know about Snape and Sirius. Betsy Hp: It seems perfectly reasonable to me that Snape see Remus as weak. After all, Remus acted quite weakly in PoA, and in ways that Snape in particular would despise. Remus endangered Hogwarts, the students, and Harry to keep an old friend, who Remus *knew* to be a murdering Death Eater, safe and to maintain his reputation in Dumbledore's eyes. Snape, on the other hand, turned against his friends and exposed all of his past mistakes to Dumbledore, to keep the WW safe. It goes with Remus's character as a schoolboy, turning a blind-eye towards actions he *knew* were wrong. As to why Snape made that comment to Tonks.... I wonder if he wasn't testing her? I mean, an Order member suddenly turns up with a shiny new Patronus, the vigilent members would do well to question the change. A strong hit on her emotions could shake loose a stray thought or two for Snape to pick up. Or, maybe a cigar is just a cigar and he's got a certain amount of contempt for Lupin that he expresses at any opportunity. > > 8. Ok, I've been dying to ask this question for months. It's come > up once or twice before with no response. Did Snape see that > Harry's face was covered in blood? > > With all the extra security and all that going on in the wizarding > world, why didn't he ask Harry how his face got bloodied? Were > his snarky comments to Harry on the walk up to the castle just the > usual routine, done to keep up appearances, or does he still > seriously hate him so much? Betsy Hp: I think the answer to this question goes towards one of your questions under #9: > 9. > Did Snape intercept the message because he was supposed to protect > Harry, or just to have another golden opportunity to give him a > bad time? Betsy Hp: I think Snape intercepted the message and collected Harry to protect *Draco*. I think Draco was being closely watched, and if he seemed to fall under any suspicion he'd have been killed. Earning a detention on his first day back at Hogwarts would not have looked good. Especially for attacking Harry. If Hagrid or McGonagall had collected Harry, they'd have questioned him. And Harry, as he does with Tonks, would have told them what Draco had done. I'm sure Snape was keeping a close eye on Draco, so I'm sure he figured out that there'd been some altercation between Draco and Harry as soon as Draco arrived. By going down to get Harry, Snape turns Harry's anger onto himself. By taunting him and refusing to mention Harry's bloody face, Snape keeps Harry's attention on himself. By the time they get to the Great Hall, Harry has all but forgotten about his injuries (Ron has to remind him that he's bloody). I think this is a case of Snape manipulating an emotional Harry. > 13. Here is one of my favorite parts in the book, for surprise > value, Dumbledore announcing Slughorn as Potions teacher. How did > you react when you read Dumbledore's announcement of Slughorn as > potions master? Were you shocked? Did you expect it at all? > When Harry and Dumbledore were going to meet Slughorn, did you > think it was to hire him for DADA? Betsy Hp: I was totally shocked. And I loved it! Especially Harry's angsty, "NOOOoooooooOOOOOOoooooOOOOO!!!!!!" (Okay, I may exaggerate. ) Of course, I thought this would be the harbinger of many a clash between Snape and Harry, so that was too bad. But, we did get Harry crushing on his new best friend, "The half-blood Prince", and obsessing over Draco (his appearance, his class attendence, his under-age harem...), so there were compensations. > 15. How do you feel about Harry's savage comment that at least it > means Snape will be gone by the end of the year? Did Harry's > comment about keeping his fingers crossed for another death > disturb you? Betsy Hp: It did. Not that I thought (or think) that Harry will turn into a stone-cold killer, but he's definitely got a weakness here. One that would be rather easy to exploit for any inclined to do so. Heck, *Snape* exploits Harry's feelings towards him and uses them to manipulate Harry. What would Voldemort do with such a handy lever? Or Malfoy? What would Fake!Moody have done with it, if Harry's hatred had run so deep at the time of GoF? > 16. Do you think Dumbledore's specific mentioning of not > wandering after bedtime is aimed at the trio in particular? Betsy Hp: Heh. YES. I don't think any other students wander about quite so freely. (Maybe because none of the other students have a map and invisibility cloak?) > 17. When Harry tells Ron about the things he overheard Draco > saying on the train, we see more doubt on the part of Harry's > circle about his suspicions of Draco. Why doesn't Ron believe > that Draco is up to anything? Betsy Hp: Ron has the blind spot of the mighty. They're always surprised when the worm finally turns. Harry, having been the worm a time or two himself, is not quite so complacent. Harry also has a stronger grasp of what someone can be capable of when it's family. Ron's never really gotten that. Neither has Hermione for that matter. Strangely enough, this is one area where Harry and Draco are very much on the same page. Really great summary and questions, Sherry! Betsy Hp From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Tue Jan 17 23:19:32 2006 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Tue, 17 Jan 2006 23:19:32 -0000 Subject: CHAPDISC: HBP8, Snape Victorious In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146624 > > Sherry: > > > > 15. How do you feel about Harry's savage comment that at least it > means > > Snape will be gone by the end of the year? Did Harry's comment > about > > keeping his fingers crossed for another death disturb you? Alla: I now read what others said and can offer my answer to this question - NOPE it did not disturb me at all. Harry IMO has ALL the reasons in the world to hate Snape and unless he starts making preparations to actually kill him, I am not bothered. Actually scratch that, unless it will turn out that Snape is a good guy, I will not be bothered by Harry's desire to kill Snape, because I am pretty confident that Harry will not carry out his preparations at the end, whether Snape is loyal to Dumbledore or not. If Snape is evil, I am confident enough to make the prediction that he will not be killed by Harry's hand. Was it SSSusan who said that we all wish bad things to those who hurt us sometimes? And Snape IMO certainly hurt Harry PLENTY of times. Come to think of it, I am not sure at all why I am so strangely not bothered by Harry's attempts to cast Unforgivables. I mean, Harry is my favorite character, so I should worry by what appears to be "temptations" to the Dark side, but for some reason I am not at all. Maybe because I believe JKR's interviews and I took her words that Harry will not go to the Dark side to heart, so I am not worried about it. Maybe I think that JKR is not that interested in the "temptation" theme and explored it to the extent she wanted in the HBP. I think that book was Harry's biggest temptation and yes, the book was able to seduce him couple of times IMO, but I am satisfied that Harry was horrified enough and will not continue casting the curses he has no clue about. As to Harry trying to cast Unforgivables, Dumbledore seemed to think that he is of pure heart regardless of that, so probably that adds to me not worrying AND the fact that Harry tried them at the moments of HUGE emotional distress, just witnessing the murder of the loved ones and STILL did not have enough intent to cast it properly. Nope, I am not worried. Harry's attempts to use Dark magic only make his journey more interesting to me, since I think that his ability to Love is too strong to allow him to slip into Darkness. JMO, Alla From donnawonna at worldnet.att.net Tue Jan 17 23:56:32 2006 From: donnawonna at worldnet.att.net (Donna) Date: Tue, 17 Jan 2006 18:56:32 -0500 (Eastern Standard Time) Subject: Book 1 Questions References: Message-ID: <43CD8430.000014.01084@D33LDD51> No: HPFGUIDX 146625 I have just started rereading the Sorcerer's Stone for the umpteenth time. Every time I read one of the books I discover something new to me. I read for pleasure and always miss clues and oddities. I apologize ahead of time if these have already been covered. I do good to read a few posts each day much less the dozens that are made daily. All references are to the US Version. 1. On the list of supplies needed for first years is the note, "PARENTS ARE REMINDED THAT FIRST YEARS ARE NOT ALLOWED THEIR OWN BROOMSTICKS". (Chap. 5, Pg. 67). Harry receives his Nimbus 2000 broomstick from Prof. McG (Chap. 10, Pg. 164) because of "special circumstances" (Pg. 165). Does special flying abilities warrant the school breaking its own rules? Wouldn't a school broomstick been adequate? 2. The Malfoy's are suppose to be "upper crust" in the WW and, according to Draco,"...mother's up the street looking at wands," (Ch. 5, Pg 77). Mr. Ollivander states, The wand chooses the wizard." (Ch. 5, Pg 85). Is Mrs. Malfoy buying Draco's wand while he's being fitted for robes? Would a wand that did not choose the wizard be good enough for the Malfoy's son, considering their standing in the WW? 3. How did Hagrid get the key to Harry's safe in Gringott's (Ch. 5, Pg. 73)? 4. What was the green smoke that came out of Harry's safe when the door was opened? 5. Why wasn't the dark wizards that broke into Gringott's vault (Ch. 8, Pg 141) sucked through the door and trapped in the vault (Ch. 5, Pg.76)? How would the dark wizards know the counter-curse to prevent being sucked through the door? Did the dark wizards have a goblin accomplice? Donna [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Wed Jan 18 00:06:02 2006 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Wed, 18 Jan 2006 00:06:02 -0000 Subject: Snape ignoring HP blood (was: CHAPDISC: HBP8) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146626 > zgirnius: > I would say that if Snape saw the blood, he knew Harry was healed. It > was dry blood, and it was not continuing to flow from his nose. (This > was not stated in the text, but follows from the fact that Tonks had > fixed it). Snape was being nasty by letting Harry walk into the Great > Hall looking a complete mess-not by allowing Harry continue to suffer > from any physical injury in silence. > Alla: I am afraid that I have to disagree here. Snape MAY have known that Harry was healed, but to me it is absolutely not a given, quite the contrary. All that JKR had to do to make sure we knew that Snape knew :- ) was to add to Tonks' words " I am sending a word to the castle that I got you" ( I quoted them yesterday, but don't have a book right now and am typing after a very tough day, so sorry if I misquote) - "and that you are fine" or something like that. JKR does not do it, so I am assuming that that is all there was to Tonks' message. Even if blood on Harry's face is dried, it does not necessarily mean that Harry does not have any internal injuries, IMO. All Snape has to do is ASK whether Harry is hurt or at least just tell him to go to the hospital wing. Not because he LIKES Harry, but because he is a teacher and he has student with A LOT of blood on his face. Isn't it a cause for concern? Just a little bit? :-) I guess not for Snape. :-) I mean, his insults there nasty, no question about it, but that was indeed Snape being his typical disgusting self ( as I see him), but Snape ignoring the possibility of Harry being injured physically uppes Snape's behaviour to higher level of nastiness, to me anyway. JMO, Alla From babyhrndz at yahoo.com Wed Jan 18 00:17:51 2006 From: babyhrndz at yahoo.com (Amanda Shoffner) Date: Tue, 17 Jan 2006 16:17:51 -0800 (PST) Subject: Snape ignoring HP blood (was: CHAPDISC: HBP8) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20060118001751.9441.qmail@web30807.mail.mud.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 146628 Alla: I mean, his insults there nasty, no question about it, but that was indeed Snape being his typical disgusting self ( as I see him), but Snape ignoring the possibility of Harry being injured physically uppes Snape's behavior to higher level of nastiness, to me anyway. Amanda: If Snape is OfH/LVM, then the cruelty is, IMO, because it's HP and SS does not like being near him so either doesn't care/notice. If SS is DDM, then it would not be good for him to show concern for HP's well being by giving him time to clean up/check on his nose. If someone, such as Draco, were to report to LV that SS was making HP's life pleasant instead of embarrassing him, then being in favor with LV in order to be DDM would be that much harder. ~Amanda From agdisney at msn.com Wed Jan 18 00:35:59 2006 From: agdisney at msn.com (Andrea Grevera) Date: Tue, 17 Jan 2006 19:35:59 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Patronus characteristics (was Re: Cheating) References: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146629 Luckdragon: > But if DD were entombed & unable to get out on his own and sending off a message via his patronus would it not say "get me out of here". Andie: I've been searching quick quotes for some canon on thoughts that I have and I came across this sentence from a JKR interview, "Harry, Jessica and me July 8, 2000. "...but once you're dead you're dead. No magic power can resurrect a TRULY (my emphasis) dead person." Is DD TRULY dead? Re-reading HBP, pg 609, "The locket they had managed to steal so many hours before had fallen out of DD pocket. It had opened, perhaps due to the force with which it hit the ground." Did DD open it on his slow descent and find that the horcrux was a fake and realized it would be better if everyone at the moment thought him dead so he could go after it again without LV knowing the he was alive? And if DD is TRULY dead then from JRK website, "Wizards have ways of making sure their voices are heard after their death." So I'm sure that one way or another Harry will receive help from DD. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From zgirnius at yahoo.com Wed Jan 18 00:47:41 2006 From: zgirnius at yahoo.com (zgirnius) Date: Wed, 18 Jan 2006 00:47:41 -0000 Subject: Snape ignoring HP blood (was: CHAPDISC: HBP8) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146630 > Alla: > > I am afraid that I have to disagree here. Snape MAY have known that > Harry was healed, but to me it is absolutely not a given, quite the > contrary. All that JKR had to do to make sure we knew that Snape knew :- > ) was to add to Tonks' words " I am sending a word to the castle that I > got you" ( I quoted them yesterday, but don't have a book right now and > am typing after a very tough day, so sorry if I misquote) - "and that > you are fine" or something like that. zgirnius: But if she knew him to NOT be fine, she would have presumably mentioned this fact to Snape in person or in the message? Not to mention that there is no hint of any other injury. Harry is walking/moving normally, and he is not bleeding. Not does he bring up the subject. > Alla: > Even if blood on Harry's face is dried, it does not necessarily mean > that Harry does not have any internal injuries, IMO. > All Snape has to > do is ASK whether Harry is hurt or at least just tell him to go to the > hospital wing. zgirnius: But Harry does not need to go to the hospital wing. Why should Snape send him there? > Alla: > Not because he LIKES Harry, but because he is a teacher and he has > student with A LOT of blood on his face. Isn't it a cause for concern? > Just a little bit? :-) zgirnius: Sure, it is cause for concern. I am sure Snape took a look and satisfied himself that there was nothing serious wrong. A conclusion supported by Tonks not bringing it up in the first place. Just dried blood, either from an unknown cause Harry did not wish to discuss, or from Draco's actions (assuming Snape knew about them-if he did he can be even more sure anout the lack of seriousness of the injury). It was not the nice, concerned, caring, friendly thing for Snape to do. But it was part and parcel of making Harry walk into the Great Hall without his cloak. In fact, it rather makes sense of the latter action, to my mind. Everyone is eating, people are not really likely to make much of Harry walking in late...unless he comes in looking like he was just in a fight. From juli17 at aol.com Wed Jan 18 01:18:57 2006 From: juli17 at aol.com (juli17 at aol.com) Date: Tue, 17 Jan 2006 20:18:57 EST Subject: Tonks' patronus & Snape ignoring HP blood (was: CHAPDISC: HBP8) Message-ID: <269.4311fe2.30fef181@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 146631 SSSusan wrote: > I just don't quite get where this came from... whereas when I thought > it was a dog patronus representing Sirius, it "fit" better with what > we know about Snape and Sirius. Gerry wrote: Well, Remus let James have his fun with Snape, though he -was- a prefect and could have stopped it. But that would have meant going against his friends, and Remus is weak as far as that is concerned. Snape is sure to have picked that up. Julie: This was my interpretation also. I think we've discussed how Remus is bit of a fence-sitter, reluctant to take action or state his feelings openly. He silently disapproved of many of James and Sirius's actions in their Marauder days, but he didn't interfere. He tells Harry that he neither likes nor dislikes Snape. While there is some value in being diplomatic, Remus sometimes comes off as apathetic, unwilling to take a real stand. Snape, OTOH, wouldn't know apathetic if it hit him over the head (nor diplomatic, of course!). He has no problem making his feelings and opinions known, loudly and clearly. Despite his spy role, he's in no way reluctant to take action. He's about as far from a passive observer as one can get. He'd no doubt see Lupin's passiveness as a weakness (which it sometimes is), and he wouldn't hesitate to deride it. Add to that Snape probably considers Tonks pining for Lupin--who hasn't returned her sentiment in any overt manner--a weakness in *her* character (fools who wear their hearts on their sleeves, etc). So he manages two insults with one barb ;-) Julie [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From carodave92 at yahoo.com Wed Jan 18 01:28:57 2006 From: carodave92 at yahoo.com (carodave92) Date: Wed, 18 Jan 2006 01:28:57 -0000 Subject: Dumbledore's Trusting Nature Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146632 In re-reading HBP (US edition), I noticed a comment regarding Dumbledore's trusting nature. Unfortunately, now that it is time to post my question, I can no longer find the quote, but as I remember it, someone remarked that Dumbledore's weakness is that he HAS to see the best in people. Not that he looks for the best, or would like to believe the best, but that he HAS to, which implies lack of choice in the matter. Of course, I could be reading into this based upon his continued trust of Snape and Malfoy in the face of all evidence, but it struck me as an odd choice of wording. Did anyone else notice this, and do you think it has any meaning? Is there already a thread on this topic? (If so, please point me to it.) Carodave From horridporrid03 at yahoo.com Wed Jan 18 01:44:43 2006 From: horridporrid03 at yahoo.com (horridporrid03) Date: Wed, 18 Jan 2006 01:44:43 -0000 Subject: The GoF Train Scene (was:Re: Humanity, Kant, Caricatures, and Draco) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146633 > >>SSSusan: > Oh, I remember my first reaction to reading this scene. I was > *totally* dumbstruck and *totally* pissed at Draco's > insensitivity. I believe I may have even said aloud, "What a > prick!" > It wasn't even the threats to Ron & Hermione so much, which I > suppose one could argue were "same old, same old" for Draco; it > was mostly his CRASSNESS and CRUELTY in saying "Well - second - > Diggory was the f [irst]." Oooooh!! In my opinion, in that > moment, that action of Draco's meant that he deserved to be come > down upon. > Betsy Hp: I'm going a bit back in time to bring this forward. I ignored SSSusan's post when it first came out because it branched off from the point I was trying to make at the time, but this is interesting to me because I recall my reaction being quite different. Rather than anger, I felt pity for Draco in that scene. I think Draco was (is) going through something that I can only compare to students at West Point at the beginning of the US Civil War. People he admired are suddenly enemies. And people he disliked are suddenly allies. Draco *liked* Cedric. I don't want to overstate it; they weren't best friends or anything. But Cedric went up against and actually managed to (at times) beat Harry Potter. Draco, I'm sure, cheered for Cedric during the triwizard tournament. He even made buttons for Cedric. Yes, part of that (the greater part, I'm sure) was to get at Harry. But Draco deliberately sided with Cedric, and now suddenly Cedric is dead and he's the enemy. Draco liked Krum. I imagine his hero worship was on par with Ron's. Ron certainly intimates as much when he accuses Draco of sucking up to Krum. When Draco wasn't cheering for Cedric, I'm sure he was cheering for Krum. And it may have had nothing to do with Harry. But then Krum was attacked and used by a Death Eater. So now, Krum is the enemy. Draco *hated* Fake!Moody. And at first that was fine with Draco's world view. Aurors are barbaric and evil. Except Fake!Moody turns out to be a Death Eater, so suddenly the man who tortured Draco, the man who attacked and used Krum, the man who helped kill Cedric, is an ally. What must Draco have been going through? He's not had a chance to speak to his father. He's only just found out that those he admires are the enemy, those he hates and fears are his friends. The only thing he can do is put a good face on it and fall back on his usual bluster. And Harry and friends come through like aces and reassure Draco that yes, the enemy are dishonorable and brutal. Except Cedric and Krum were never dishonorable and brutal and Fake! Moody was, especially towards Draco. I wonder what sort of reassurances Lucius (fresh from his own punishment for the diary thing) gave his son? And I wonder how Draco took to Umbridge? Sure, she gave Harry a hard time, but her DADA classes were a joke. Draco didn't seem to have much respect for her, and I'm sure he found her classes as much a waste of time as the rest of Hogwarts. I doubt she was someone he felt he could look up to. The end of GoF is the first time Draco is faced with what his parents' politics *really* means. It must have been a huge shock. One I think he did his best to ignore, until HBP made it impossible to do so anymore. In some ways, I think Draco's journey is more interesting than Harry's. Because Draco is having to learn that his *parents* may have been horribly, horribly, wrong. And that is never easy. So I sympathize with the poor kid. Betsy Hp From elfundeb at gmail.com Wed Jan 18 02:44:29 2006 From: elfundeb at gmail.com (elfundeb) Date: Tue, 17 Jan 2006 21:44:29 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Spies, Lies and Self fullfilling prophecies In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <80f25c3a0601171844l1021dfffg3cdb75d074b12ff9@mail.gmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 146634 Reviving a dead thread, I emerge from the shadows to make one of my periodic challenges to ESE!Lupin. Pippin, are you still there? FWIW, I agree with most of the points already made in his defense, and only have a few to add this time around. Pippin: I also tried to show was that it's canon that Snape and Sirius both thought that Lupin was capable of cooperating with a murderer, and however they came to that conclusion *they're not wrong*. We saw Lupin about to help Sirius murder Pettigrew. Debbie: But what Sirius believed was that Lupin was a spy, i.e., a traitor. Lupin's willingness to help Sirius murder Pettigrew is the antithesis of betrayal; it is a demonstration of loyalty to a friend who he has just discovered was not disloyal at all. And Snape's belief that Lupin was assisting a traitor reflects an assumption of continued loyalty within the MWPP group, not betrayal. I just don't see how this fact leads to the conclusion that Lupin would be willing to betray his closest friends. Pippin: You seem to agree with me that Lupin must have become estranged from his old friends. But what would he do then, this man who wants so much for people to like him? Where else would he turn? He wasn't naive about Voldemort. But he was, he admits, naive about other werewolves. It was a dangerous time to go looking for new friends, or so Hagrid told us in PS/SS. Debbie: While I'll admit that it's odd that Lupin is not with the other Marauders in the old Order photograph (though given the fact that the members rearrange themselves so those at the back move to the front, I think it's possible that Lupin was directly in front of the Potters, then moved behind). Moreover, if there was any estrangement, I think it did not extend beyond Lupin and Sirius (each thought the other was the spy). I don't see how he would be susceptible to an invitation to spy on Dumbledore and James, to whom he owes so much. (Sorry, Pippin, this last point is one I've made many times before.) > Carol: > I'm not so sure. Peter shows himself capable of some pretty > complicated potion making combined with spell-casting in GoF, not to > mention capable of completing the potion after he's cut off his own > hand. We see him capable of ruthlessness in his treatment of Harry and > his murder of Cedric as well. And he found Voldemort and even > kidnapped Bertha Jorkins. Pippin: When dealing with a magician like JKR, you have to be suspicious of anything Harry deduces or Voldemort reports. We know that Harry jumps to conclusions, and Voldemort lies even in his villain tells all speeches. Peter "does" all of this offstage, except for dropping the last three ingredients and Voldemort's body into the brew. Even Neville could do that much. We've seen that potion-making can be done by inexpert wizards *if* there's someone else around to make sure they follow instructions exactly. Debbie: Pettigrew's defining characteristic, I think, is not his supposed lack of magical skill, but his laziness. Of course, laziness often masquerades as ineptitude, so it should not be surprising that Pettigrew is regarded as "talentless" and "not in their league." However, a lazy wizard like Pettigrew is capable of quality work if someone stands at his elbow to make sure he doesn't lose focus and screw up. In the making of the resurrection potion, Voldemort was there to serve this function. And he was well incentivized to do a good job, as he had Voldemort to answer to as well as Voldemort's faithful servant. (See POA ch. 19, in which Sirius tells Pettigrew that "you never did anything for anyone unless you could see what was in it for you." ) For a contrasting example, Crouch Jr. states (under Veritaserum) that "Wormtail neglected his duty. He was not watchful enough. My father escaped." Wormtail was not incapable of guarding Crouch Sr. adequately, but he didn't put in the work to do a really good job. This doesn't mean he is incompetent; he's just too inattentive to do a proper job. Pippin: The murder of Cedric is ambiguous. Harry thinks Voldemort did it. JKR said that "Wormtail" killed Cedric. But Wormtail is an *alias*. Like Discworld's Commander Vimes, I want to throw my hands in the air at this point, and shout, "You recognized him by his MASK?" The whole point of a mask is that *anyone* can hide behind it. The whole point of an *alias* is that you don't know who it is. I don't think we can be too sure she meant Peter. Especially since, as loyal DDM!Snape supporters, we must believe that JKR is highly, er, selective, about what she tells us. Debbie: This argument might have more weight if Wormtail was a code name given to him by Voldemort. As it is, lots of people know who Wormtail is. Lupin knows, of course. "Sirius is Padfoot. Peter is Wormtail." Lupin tells us in PoA. And so does Voldemort, who is on the other side. And Snape, too, who has a foot in both camps. Given the generality of use of Wormtail, for Wormtail to be someone else would be more than misdirection; it would be a lie. Since Lupin was certainly right about the other three nicknames, and Wormtail is used by so many people to describe Pettigrew (and to his face), I think we are meant to understand that there is no other. Carol: I think he feigned friendship for a whole year without a qualm, all the while passing information on Order members (starting, maybe, with those he cared least about but working steadily toward the Potters. Pippin: This is a very different Peter, then, from the one we see in the graveyard, who can't look Harry in the eye, or the one in the Shrieking Shack whose stammering and haunted looks betray him long before his confession does. If Peter had been able to look Harry in the eye and answer Sirius's accusations in complete sentences, his story would have held up. "Everyone knows Sirius was the secret-keeper. It's absurd to think that I was the spy. I adored James, I never would have betrayed him. I went into hiding because I was afraid that the Death Eaters would want revenge -- because I'd put the *real* spy in Azkaban!" Debbie: But no one would have asked Peter these questions before Godric's Hollow. As Sirius says, no one would believe that Voldemort would use a "weak, talentless thing" like Pettigrew. Had they asked, Pettigrew might have spilled the beans. But a more likely response would be something on the order of "N-n-no," which given the assumption that he's not in their league, everyone would write off as the natural cowardice of the weak. He was a perfect spy because he didn't seem capable of it. Pippin: Peter's clever enough to think of it, but he can't bring it off, because unlike whoever the spy really is, he's a lousy liar and obviously not an occlumens. When have we actually *seen* him lie successfully? He didn't even do a very good job of pretending to be a an ordinary rat...biting Goyle and then falling asleep again? Didn't you think that was rather odd? Hanging around with the Weasleys for far longer than an ordinary rat's life span? Wouldn't he have been wiser to find another wizarding family every few years? Wormtail should not have spent 12 years with the Weasleys before changing families, but moving to a new family would require actual work and he had no reason to believe the Weasleys would suspect something. So why bother with caution? When he was really in danger, in POA, Pettigrew was quite ready with a solution (faking his own death). That would have worked quite well except that he was too lazy to leave Hogwarts. He *was* the secret keeper and he was forced to betray the Potters. He's too racked with guilt to successfully pretend that he didn't. But how could he be the spy? Good Heavens, he can't manage to spy on Snape and co for five minutes, he can't be questioned without breaking into a sweat, and you think he was spying on the Order of the Phoenix for a year while everyone around him was hunting for the spy? "Peter, you haven't seen anything suspicious, have you? "And Peter answers,"Well, I saw Sirius listening at a keyhole the other day" and neither Lupin, who seems to be a legilimens, nor Albus Dumbledore, who definitely is one, notices anything wrong? Good Grief! Debbie: Peter is a dreadful sneak, but in the old days, he didn't have to sneak around to glean information. And he could do his traveling in rat form, making him undetectable. I read Pettigrew's appearance in Spinner's End largely as petulance at Snape's subtle put-downs, not as a bumbling attempt to spy (I read the scene as Snape *assuming* that Peter was spying; I didn't think Snape had detected his presence on the stairs). As for Dumbledore, I imagine that Pettigrew would have steered clear of him generally, and since Dumbledore is the type to let others think things out for themselves, would not have forced his presence on him. Debbie who first defended Lupin against ESE! accusations way back in 2002, but finds Pettigrew's laziness indefensible [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From drednort at alphalink.com.au Wed Jan 18 03:05:38 2006 From: drednort at alphalink.com.au (Shaun Hately) Date: Wed, 18 Jan 2006 14:05:38 +1100 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Snape ignoring HP blood (was: CHAPDISC: HBP8) In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <43CE4B32.30477.111A719@drednort.alphalink.com.au> No: HPFGUIDX 146635 On 18 Jan 2006 at 0:08, dumbledore11214 wrote: > Even if blood on Harry's face is dried, it does not necessarily mean > that Harry does not have any internal injuries, IMO. All Snape has to > do is ASK whether Harry is hurt or at least just tell him to go to > the hospital wing. > > Not because he LIKES Harry, but because he is a teacher and he has > student with A LOT of blood on his face. Isn't it a cause for > concern? Just a little bit? :-) OK - once again, bringing my own school experiences in here. For those who don't know I attending a school of a type that I think it quite similar in character to the schools that JKR based Hogwarts on, and I often think that some people reading the books who are unfamiliar with these types of schools can see things a bit differently from some of us who are familiar with them. I can say that virtually any of my teachers would have been likely to ignore injuries like those Snape saw in the same type of situation that we see in Half Blood Prince. And I did have teachers ignore such injuries when I had suffered them. They would have only done so if they were confident a student didn't need medical care. If they suspected a reasonable chance that they did, then they wouldn't have ignored it (and if they did, they'd have been seriously failing in a teachers duty of care). But if they were confident that the student was unlikely to need medical care, then it's very possible they'd have ignored such injuries? Why - because it looks like the injuries came from some sort of fight. And if they start asking questions, then they are probably going to wind up having to inquire about more than just the injuries. They are going to have to look into what the students did - and probably wind up having to punish people. Harry isn't a little boy - he's a capable sixteen year old. If he needs medical attention, he's capable of asking for it. Yes, he's got some blood on his face - but that appears to be his only sign of injury (Hermione cleans the blood of his face, and is asked if his nose looks all right and says that it does). Frankly, Harry looks like he's been in a fight - ignoring such evidence is something that I would expect a teacher at Hogwarts to ignore under normal circumstances (if it happens too often, or if it's a student who you think is likely to be victimised - if this was Neville, I would expect, more reaction for example - things change a bit. But generally speaking, Snape's reaction in this regard strikes me as entirely normal). And if it didn't - Harry attracts attention as he enters the Great Hall - and he still has blood on his face then. Why didn't Professor McGonnagal check if he was OK - she has a more direct responsibility for Harry than Snape does (note - this would not excuse Snape if he was in the wrong - while his duty of care towards Harry is less than McGonnagal's, initially he is the only teacher present - and so if something should have been done, he should have done it - distinctions in duty of care are only really relevant when there is somebody with a higher duty present - all teachers have some duty of care, in my view (and in Muggle law... whether Wizarding law is the same is debatable). Basically, McGonnagal does exactly what Snape does. She ignored the blood. If Snape should have acted in response to it, she definitely should have. Yours Without Wax, Dreadnought Shaun Hately | www.alphalink.com.au/~drednort/thelab.html (ISTJ) | drednort at alphalink.com.au | ICQ: 6898200 "You know the very powerful and the very stupid have one thing in common. They don't alter their views to fit the facts. They alter the facts to fit the views. Which can be uncomfortable if you happen to be one of the facts that need altering." The Doctor - Doctor Who: The Face of Evil Where am I: Frankston, Victoria, Australia From Nanagose at aol.com Wed Jan 18 03:19:15 2006 From: Nanagose at aol.com (spotsgal) Date: Wed, 18 Jan 2006 03:19:15 -0000 Subject: Dumbledore's Trusting Nature In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146636 > Carodave: > In re-reading HBP (US edition), I noticed a comment regarding > Dumbledore's trusting nature. Unfortunately, now that it is time to > post my question, I can no longer find the quote, but as I remember > it, someone remarked that Dumbledore's weakness is that he HAS to > see the best in people. Not that he looks for the best, or would > like to believe the best, but that he HAS to, which implies lack of > choice in the matter. Of course, I could be reading into this based > upon his continued trust of Snape and Malfoy in the face of all > evidence, but it struck me as an odd choice of wording. Christina: You're thinking of Snape's words to Bellatrix, on page 31 of the Scholastic ed: "And you overlook Dumbledore's greatest weakness: He has to believe the best of people. I spun him a tale of deepest remorse when I joined his staff, fresh from my Death Eater days, and he embraced me with open arms -- though, as I say, never allowing me nearer the Dark Arts than he could help." The argument over "Dumbledore's greatest weakness" has come up a LOT when talking about Snape and how truthful (and/or insightful) he was being while talking to Bellatrix. One thread in which we discuss it starts here: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/140731 but there are many more, I'm sure. This thread talks a bit about instances in which Dumbledore *doesn't* believe the best in people, ie, keeping an eye on young Tom Riddle (even though the rest of the staff at Hogwarts had fallen head-over-heels for the boy), and his uneasiness about Sirius being the Potters' Secret-Keeper. Snape's choice of words here (the *has* to) is meant, I suspect, to emphasize how weak Dumbledore is - as in, he can't help but to think with anything but his heart. It is also interesting that Snape makes Dumbledore's need to believe the best in others absolute, then qualifies it by saying that Dumbledore basically never trusted Snape himself enough to let him near the Dark Arts. Now, about Draco. JKR has said herself that Draco would not have killed Dumbledore. Now, you might say that Dumbledore went beyond the call of duty in his efforts to *protect* Malfoy (which is a valid opinion), but Dumbledore's judgements about his inherant character *were* on the mark. Dumbledore certainly didn't believe the "best" in Draco during his sixth year; he suspected that Draco was trying to kill him and asked Snape to keep an eye on the boy. A man that has to believe the best in people would never have believed that a child would have attempted to commit murder. And yet, Dumbledore believes that Draco is not a killer, which is true. It seems to me that Dumbledore has neither under- or over-estimated Draco's character; instead, he's almost directly on the mark. As for Snape - well, only the seventh book will tell how correct Dumbledore was in estimating *his* character. Christina From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Wed Jan 18 03:43:13 2006 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Wed, 18 Jan 2006 03:43:13 -0000 Subject: Snape ignoring HP blood (was: CHAPDISC: HBP8) In-Reply-To: <43CE4B32.30477.111A719@drednort.alphalink.com.au> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146637 Shaun: > They would have only done so if they were confident a student didn't > need medical care. If they suspected a reasonable chance that they > did, then they wouldn't have ignored it (and if they did, they'd have > been seriously failing in a teachers duty of care). But if they were > confident that the student was unlikely to need medical care, then > it's very possible they'd have ignored such injuries? Alla: I snipped a lot, because that is my main point - I don't think that Snape CAN be confident that Harry does not need medical care at all. IMO of course. He does not just have a tricle of blood on his face, his whole face is bloodied. I think Snape should have checked, but of course he is Snape. It is just I cannot help but be amazed every time I see the new evidence of his cruelty.(IMO of course) I am just wondering how far he can go. I stated in my previous post that I believe that as of right now Snape does not want Harry dead ( and I do NOT think that he has altruistic reasons of course. But I obviously just speculating here), but in my speculative opinion if Harry experiences any kind of suffering less than death(or something that can lead to death as Crucio), be it physical or emotional, Snape will not do anything. Shaun: > Harry isn't a little boy - he's a capable sixteen year old. > > If he needs medical attention, he's capable of asking for it. Alla: I speculate that Harry would not ask Snape for medical attention even if he will be close to death as things stand right now. I don't think that it excuses Snape not asking though. Just my opinion obviously, Alla From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Wed Jan 18 04:05:30 2006 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Wed, 18 Jan 2006 04:05:30 -0000 Subject: The GoF Train Scene (was:Re: Humanity, Kant, Caricatures, and Draco) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146638 Betsy Hp wrote: > Draco *hated* Fake!Moody. And at first that was fine with Draco's > world view. Aurors are barbaric and evil. Except Fake!Moody turns > out to be a Death Eater, so suddenly the man who tortured Draco, the > man who attacked and used Krum, the man who helped kill Cedric, is > an ally. Carol responds: Sorry for snipping most of your interesting post, which certainly presents the incident from a perspective that never occurred to me--nor, I would guess, to most of the people on this list. But I wonder if Draco ever found out that Fake!Moody was Barty Crouch Jr. (whom he, like everyone else, would have thought dead, if he knew about him at all). Dumbledore at the end-of-term feast said very little about what happened to Cedric and Harry, though he honored them, and nothing at all about what happened to Krum or Fake!Moody. The real Moody is still alive. Is it generally known at Hogwarts, much less in the WW at large, that "Moody" was an imposter who had his soul sucked out by a Dementor while the real Moody was locked in his own trunk for ten months? Certainly Fudge, who is on the outs with Dumbledore and controlling the Daily Prophet in OoP, was unlikely to leak the real story. Granted, his father probably told him that Voldemort had been resurrected, and he may even have mentioned Wormtail, but he knew nothing about "the loyal Death Eater at Hogwarts." Would Draco have figured out that the mad Auror who turned him into a ferret was the same person as the loyal DE who put Harry's name in the Goblet of Fire and turned it into a portkey? I don't think he knows what happened. Granted, DADA classes were cancelled at the end of term, but the real Moody attended the end-of-year feast. Were the students ever given an explanation? Harry certainly didn't tell anyone. (The DA members in OoP demonstrate pretty clearly that even students in houses other than Slytherin have very little idea of what Harry has gone through, and none of them knows what happened to Harry and Cedric when they disappeared from the maze.) So while I understand the point you're making about Draco's world suddenly turning upside down, I wonder if he really knew as much as you seem to think he does about Fake!Moody's real identity or even about Krum being attacked and used by him. It's unclear just how much the spectators saw from the stands. Did they realize that Krum had Crucio'd Cedric and that Harry had to stun him? If so, do they wonder why Krum isn't in Azkaban? Do they know why Karkaroff ran away after the third task and deserted his students? Do they know that Fake!Moody was a Death Eater, even if they don't know his name? I see no evidence that they know any of these things. So while Draco and his fellow sons of Death Eaters know that Voldemort is indeed back, and by the end of OoP, Draco's idolized father is in Azkaban, but I think he's very far from knowing the full situation. Carol, wishing that Dumbledore would just explain things and not leave people wondering (but then, we wouldn't be here if he did) From willsonkmom at msn.com Wed Jan 18 04:22:37 2006 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Wed, 18 Jan 2006 04:22:37 -0000 Subject: CHAPDISC: HBP8, Snape Victorious In-Reply-To: <002a01c61ab8$b41be730$0400a8c0@pensive> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146639 > 5. I just noticed this when working on this chapter and actually reading it > in braille instead of hearing audio where I can't tell how a sentence is > punctuated. Snape tells Tonks that Harry is > > "quite--ah--safe in my hands." > > Is there any implication in his words here, or is it just done for emphasis, > to add some sharpness, for Harry's benefit? Or for Tonks? Just curious > about how this was written. Any thoughts? Potioncat: Snape does like to act. I think he was playing Vincent Price this time. > > 6. Later in HBP, we learn that Tonks' patronus is now a wolf, and we're led > to suspect it has changed because of her love for Remus. But here at this > point, we don't know any of that yet. Why do you think Snape made these > comments about her patronus? He hasn't seemed to have any particular > feelings one way or the other about Tonks previously; in fact, did we ever > see them interact before? Why does he say that her patronus is weak? What > do you think about the whole significance of the changing patronus? Does it > foreshadow events yet to come, or are there implications about Lupin in > Snape's comments? Potioncat: Well, up till now Tonks was Snape's lover and he's just seen proof that....never mind. It would be really, really nice to know what her previous Patronus was. I'm sure the strength of a Patronus has more to do with the one who casts it than what its form is. So even a butterfly would still be a strong Patronus. It's hard then to tell if he's making a dig at her condition or at Lupin. But I think it's at her. He calls her Nyphadora (please excuse spelling) Who else does he call by first name? Some old friends and Draco. I suggest that Tonks was a Slytherin and he was her Head of House. Whether or not I'm right, he's also worked with her in the Order and I think he's giving her some harsh truth. > > > 8. Ok, I've been dying to ask this question for months. It's come up once > or twice before with no response. Did Snape see that Harry's face was > covered in blood? He did have a lantern with him, and when they entered the > school there was a lot of light. If he did see it, why didn't he comment or > why didn't he realize that Harry had not been late on purpose, that > something must have happened to Harry on the way? If you believe he didn't > see it, why not, how could he not see it? With all the extra security and > all that going on in the wizarding world, why didn't he ask Harry how his > face got bloodied? Were his snarky comments to Harry on the walk up to the > castle just the usual routine, done to keep up appearances, or does he still > seriously hate him so much? Potioncat: My honest reaction was "why didn't Tonks or Snape remove the blood?" I'm not sure if Snape was trying to get the truth out of Harry or avoid getting the truth. I agree with Shaun that Snape wouldn't have wanted to know too much about what happened. I also think that someone with Snape's healing skills would be able to tell if there was a significant injury behind all that blood. As someone who has seen blood...a little goes a long way. So between Tonks bringing him calmly up to the gates, and his own skills of observation, I'm sure he knew Harry was OK. (The man could stand to take a class on Universal Precautions, however.) Of greater interest might be the conversation after dinner in the Staff Lounge. "For heaven's sake Severus. What did you mean by bringing Potter to dinner in such condition? Half of Hufflpuff upchucked their supper on the table!" > > 9. Hermione tells Harry that Hagrid was only a few minutes late, yet Snape > had said that Tonks' message to Hagrid couldn't reach him, because Hagrid > was late, and that was why, he, Snape, had taken the message instead. Was > this true? Do you think Snape intercepted the patronus message before it > could reach its intended recipient? How long do Patronuses take to arrive > with a message? Did it arrive when Hagrid was not there? Did Snape > intercept the message because he was supposed to protect Harry, or just to > have another golden opportunity to give him a bad time? Potioncat: Unless Snape's Dark Magic is greater than DD's magic, he couldn't have improperly intercepted it. My guess is that Tonks sent the Patronus expecting Hagrid to see it first, but Snape did. I'm leaning toward this being a red herring to mislead us into thinking Snape is bad. (Silly idea, that.) > > 13. Here is one of my favorite parts in the book, for surprise value, > Dumbledore announcing Slughorn as Potions teacher. How did you react when > you read Dumbledore's announcement of Slughorn as potions master? Were you > shocked? Did you expect it at all? When Harry and Dumbledore were going to > meet Slughorn, did you think it was to hire him for DADA? Potioncat: Does a dance and chant to show how great she thinks she is because "I knew it! I did!" There was something in the wording that clued me into it. I thought it was great! > > 14. I have racked my brains and can't remember any place in the books where > it is stated as fact that Dumbledore did not trust Snape and that is why he > has never given him the DADA post before. Is this a case of rumor and > gossip becoming fact over time? Why indeed did Dumbledore give or not give > Snape the job? Has Snape really wanted it all these years? Did you think > about the DADA curse when you heard that Snape had the position? Was Harry > correct in detecting the look of triumph on Snape's face? He hates him so > much, that every expression must be well known to him, yet his hatred may > not make him a very reliable judge of such things. Potioncat: Surely the entire WW knew it was cursed? My theory is that Snape applied for it according to LV's orders. And as he and DD expected LV to return, Snape continued to apply for it, making it look as if DD preferred anyone (cough#Lockhart#cough) to Snape. I've no idea which course he'd rather teach. He seems pretty skilled in both subjects. DD knew all along about the curse, knew that LV wanted Snape there, and finally--in DD's own time---put him there. It's hard to say what his expression really was. It's possible he didn't fully understand the nature of the jinx. Or he thought he'd be the one to break it. > > 15. How do you feel about Harry's savage comment that at least it means > Snape will be gone by the end of the year? Did Harry's comment about > keeping his fingers crossed for another death disturb you? Potioncat: Well, his wording was like a prophecy wasn't it? Maybe there'll be another death...and there was. Just not the way he expected. But I do think it was anger speaking and Harry didn't really mean it. > This was a very nice summary and discussion Sherry. Nice job! And I'll say I read all the posts before posting mine, trying not to repeat comments, but hopefully to add something new or slightly different. > From belviso at attglobal.net Wed Jan 18 04:40:40 2006 From: belviso at attglobal.net (Magpie) Date: Tue, 17 Jan 2006 23:40:40 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] The GoF Train Scene (was:Re: Humanity, Kant, Caricatures, and Draco) References: Message-ID: <012101c61be9$56ceef50$8678400c@Spot> No: HPFGUIDX 146640 justcarol: > But I wonder if Draco ever found out that Fake!Moody was Barty Crouch > Jr. (whom he, like everyone else, would have thought dead, if he knew > about him at all). Magpie: Your suggestion that he doesn't know all this makes sense to me, but I think there's a conversation between Umbridge and Dean where she refers to their Death Eater teacher and Dean confirms their being taught by a DE but says they learned loads. At least that's how I remember it--I don't have the book to look it up. I have no idea how the kids would have found out, but that scene seemed to suggest it was known by some people, including Dean the Muggleborn. I've long given up on trying to apply logic to the Hogwarts Information Mill, myself. -m From drednort at alphalink.com.au Wed Jan 18 04:28:12 2006 From: drednort at alphalink.com.au (Shaun Hately) Date: Wed, 18 Jan 2006 15:28:12 +1100 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Snape ignoring HP blood (was: CHAPDISC: HBP8) In-Reply-To: References: <43CE4B32.30477.111A719@drednort.alphalink.com.au> Message-ID: <43CE5E8C.6507.15D44F3@drednort.alphalink.com.au> No: HPFGUIDX 146641 On 18 Jan 2006 at 3:43, dumbledore11214 wrote: > Shaun: > > > They would have only done so if they were confident a student > didn't > > need medical care. If they suspected a reasonable chance that they > > did, then they wouldn't have ignored it (and if they did, they'd > have > > been seriously failing in a teachers duty of care). But if they > were > > confident that the student was unlikely to need medical care, then > > it's very possible they'd have ignored such injuries? > > > Alla: > > I snipped a lot, because that is my main point - I don't think that > Snape CAN be confident that Harry does not need medical care at all. > IMO of course. He does not just have a tricle of blood on his face, > his whole face is bloodied. I think Snape should have checked, but > of > course he is Snape. It is just I cannot help but be amazed every > time > I see the new evidence of his cruelty.(IMO of course) I am just > wondering how far he can go. I stated in my previous post that I > believe that as of right now Snape does not want Harry dead ( and I > do > NOT think that he has altruistic reasons of course. But I obviously > just speculating here), but in my speculative opinion if Harry > experiences any kind of suffering less than death(or something that > can lead to death as Crucio), be it physical or emotional, Snape > will > not do anything. Dried blood on their face is not a sign that a person is really likely to need medical care (incidentally, I'm qualified to administer first aid in a school environment so assessing injuries in students is something I know a little about - in our modern legal climate I would never ignore blood but if it was dried, my biggest concern would be issues like blood borne pathogens, not injury to the bloodied student). Kids get blood noses a lot. Sometimes they bleed an awful lot. Once they stop bleeding, you really don't worry about them. In fact, I've just pulled my book out - this is the book we used here for the course that qualified me as a school first aider (I actually have more than just that basic course as well). The instructions for how to deal with a blood nose in that book (Australian First Aid: The Authorized Manual of St John Ambulance Australia) basically indicate no need to seek medical attention - from my training, you generally only seek medical attention if the nose bleeding hasn't stopped after 30 minutes. http://www.betterhealth.vic.gov.au/bhcv2/bhcarticles.nsf/pages/Sports_ injuries?OpenDocument gives this same advice. But looking again, what does Snape actually see? We know Harry seems to get quite a lot of blood on his face initially. "He lay there beneath the Invisibility Cloak feeling the blood from his nose flow, hot and wet, over his face... "Harry had never hated Malfoy more than as he lay there like an absurd turtle on its back, blook dripping sickeningly into his open mouth." (HBP, British Printing, p.148) It does sound like a lot of blood. BUT - "There was a flash of red light and Harry's body unfroze; he was able to push himself into a more dignified sitting position, hastily wipe the blood off his bruised face with the back of his hand and raise his head to look up at Tonks..." (p. 149). Harry wipes the blood off his face. Hastily, yes - but he wipes it off. When he gets to Ron. "'Where've you - blimey, what've you done to your face?'" 'Why, what's wrong with it?' asked Harry, grabbing a spoon and squinting at his distorted reflection." 'You're covered in blood!" said Hermione. 'Come here-'" (p. 155) Ron doesn't immediately notice Harry's face - if he was really covered in blood, you'd think Ron might have noticed instantly - he doesn't. Harry's response is to ask what's wrong - it seems to me likely that Harry believes he doesn't look that bad at this point. After all, he did try and wipe the blood off. Yes, Hermione says he's covered in blood. Personally, I think it's likely she's exagerating a bit, given Harry has attempted to clean his face. Also bear in mind that Ron and Hermione are seeing Harry in the well lit Hall. Snape saw him outside in the dark. (And it is dark - we're told this on page 148: "everyone was shuffling along the dark platform outside" and again on page 150: 'From what Harry could see in the darkness, she was as mousy-haired and miserable looking as she had been when he had met her at The Burrow'.) Snape brings a lantern - but it doesn't seem to give much light really - Harry doesn't recognise Snape until he is only ten feet away. Honestly, I don't see any reason to suppose Snape even got a good look at Harry - enough to see he wasn't in his robes, sure - but enough to see the remnants of blood that Harry had wiped off his face? Blood that his friends don't see until he has sat down between them (actually forced his way between them suggesting they are very close together) in a much better lit room. > Shaun: > > Harry isn't a little boy - he's a capable sixteen year old. > > > > If he needs medical attention, he's capable of asking for it. > > Alla: > > I speculate that Harry would not ask Snape for medical attention > even > if he will be close to death as things stand right now. I don't > think > that it excuses Snape not asking though. That is Harry's problem - if he is not willing to ask for help when he needs it, there's really little a teacher can do. He's not a little boy who needs to be coddled. And, I agree that I doubt Harry would ask Snape for help in such a situation. But that is Harry's failure and Harry's responsibility. Yours Without Wax, Dreadnought Shaun Hately | www.alphalink.com.au/~drednort/thelab.html (ISTJ) | drednort at alphalink.com.au | ICQ: 6898200 "You know the very powerful and the very stupid have one thing in common. They don't alter their views to fit the facts. They alter the facts to fit the views. Which can be uncomfortable if you happen to be one of the facts that need altering." The Doctor - Doctor Who: The Face of Evil Where am I: Frankston, Victoria, Australia From ladyluck41 at yahoo.com Tue Jan 17 20:22:40 2006 From: ladyluck41 at yahoo.com (Sherry) Date: Tue, 17 Jan 2006 20:22:40 -0000 Subject: Newbie, difficulty getting into OoP Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146642 Hi all, Thanks to my daughter's urgings, I finally started reading the HP series and I am now starting Book 5...I read 1-4 in 2 weeks as I could not put them down. I am finding, however, that I am having a difficult time getting into this book...I wonder why. Any suggestions? "ladyluck41" From coverton at netscape.com Wed Jan 18 00:22:10 2006 From: coverton at netscape.com (corey_over) Date: Wed, 18 Jan 2006 00:22:10 -0000 Subject: When will the ministry start kicking butt and taking names? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146643 Hi Members. I haven't posted in a while. I'm just wondering when the MoM is going to start kicking butt and taking names. I mean, who have they arrested? Let's see. Being sarcastic in thinking. Stan Shunpike, a death eater. He's as much a DE as me! And Scrimgeour - while he's better than Fudge, he wasn't exactly honest with Harry. Well, that's my post. Your fellow member, Corey From hubbada at unisa.ac.za Wed Jan 18 07:01:54 2006 From: hubbada at unisa.ac.za (deborahhbbrd) Date: Wed, 18 Jan 2006 07:01:54 -0000 Subject: Trelawney on stage (chapter questions) Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146644 Professor Trelawney likes to be in the public eye, which is one reason why she has assiduously shunned it in the preceding books! Like Garbo. What you see every day lacks the impact of what you see through a warm, scented haze once or twice a week. But now that she's upstaged by the scholarly and dishy Firenze, I think her appearance at the opening ceremony is a way of showing the school that she is still very much there and a futurological force to be reckoned with. As, indeed, she proves to be ... Deborah, whose vision of Trelawney is blurred perhaps by her fondness for Madame Arcati in Blythe Spirit From irene_mikhlin at btopenworld.com Wed Jan 18 07:00:57 2006 From: irene_mikhlin at btopenworld.com (IreneMikhlin) Date: Wed, 18 Jan 2006 07:00:57 +0000 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Snape ignoring HP blood (was: CHAPDISC: HBP8) In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <43CDE7A9.8060308@btopenworld.com> No: HPFGUIDX 146645 > Alla: > > I speculate that Harry would not ask Snape for medical attention > even > if he will be close to death as things stand right now. I don't > think > that it excuses Snape not asking though. > > Just my opinion obviously, And for exactly the same reason Harry wouldn't answer truthfully even if Snape had asked him if he was hurt. And Snape wouldn't trust Harry's answer if the question was "What time is it". Anyway, since when patient's opinion counts for anything? Non-verbal diagnostic spell, now, that's different. So who do you know Snape didn't run it? :-) Irene From greatraven at hotmail.com Wed Jan 18 08:27:19 2006 From: greatraven at hotmail.com (sbursztynski) Date: Wed, 18 Jan 2006 08:27:19 -0000 Subject: The GoF Train Scene (was:Re: Humanity, Kant, Caricatures, and Draco) In-Reply-To: <012101c61be9$56ceef50$8678400c@Spot> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146646 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Magpie" wrote: > > justcarol: > > But I wonder if Draco ever found out that Fake!Moody was Barty Crouch > > Jr. (whom he, like everyone else, would have thought dead, if he knew > > about him at all). > > Magpie: > Your suggestion that he doesn't know all this makes sense to me, but I think > there's a conversation between Umbridge and Dean where she refers to their > Death Eater teacher and Dean confirms their being taught by a DE but says > they learned loads. At least that's how I remember it--I don't have the > book to look it up. I have no idea how the kids would have found out, but > that scene seemed to suggest it was known by some people, including Dean the > Muggleborn. > > I've long given up on trying to apply logic to the Hogwarts Information > Mill, myself. > > -m Sue: I'd just like to add to this that Draco has no reason to like Fake! Moody even if he knew the truth, because Barty Junior is no friend to him - he hated Death Eaters who went free, remember? As far as he's concerned, the likes of Lucius have been disloyal to the Master, betrayed him, etc., and are, perhaps, worse than those who were never on his side. There's no confusion here - Barty Junior is in no way an ally of Draco and his family! > From ceridwennight at hotmail.com Wed Jan 18 10:14:31 2006 From: ceridwennight at hotmail.com (Ceridwen) Date: Wed, 18 Jan 2006 10:14:31 -0000 Subject: The GoF Train Scene (was:Re: Humanity, Kant, Caricatures, and Draco) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146647 Carol: > It's unclear just how much the spectators saw from the stands. Did > they realize that Krum had Crucio'd Cedric and that Harry had to stun > him? If so, do they wonder why Krum isn't in Azkaban? Do they know why > Karkaroff ran away after the third task and deserted his students? Do > they know that Fake!Moody was a Death Eater, even if they don't know > his name? > > I see no evidence that they know any of these things. So while Draco > and his fellow sons of Death Eaters know that Voldemort is indeed > back, and by the end of OoP, Draco's idolized father is in Azkaban, > but I think he's very far from knowing the full situation. Ceridwen: I snipped most of this, though the entire discussion is great. I'm thinking that, no matter what the WW at large thought about Karkaroff's desertion at the time, he was found dead by the beginning of HBP, a year after he ran away, killed by LV or his followers. There would be quite a few people who remembered the trials after VWI, and Karkaroff's questioning. Even with the MoM ban on news during OotP, by the time Karkaroff's body is found, the Ministry has admitted that LV is back, Dementors are breeding all over Britain, and it would be easy for thinking witches and wizards to put these events together in some semblance of order. Draco, as a student, might not take as much notice about what's going on in the wider WW. And, he has his father in Azkaban, which probably occupies a lot of his thoughts. But he must have heard some discussion by HBP, from his mother and his aunt, and from friends and their parents. Though they may not know of the things Crouch!Moody did. Ceridwen, adding her two cents. From gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk Wed Jan 18 11:07:50 2006 From: gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk (Geoff Bannister) Date: Wed, 18 Jan 2006 11:07:50 -0000 Subject: The GoF Train Scene (was:Re: Humanity, Kant, Caricatures, and Draco) In-Reply-To: <012101c61be9$56ceef50$8678400c@Spot> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146648 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Magpie" wrote: Magpie: > Your suggestion that he doesn't know all this makes sense to me, but I think > there's a conversation between Umbridge and Dean where she refers to their > Death Eater teacher and Dean confirms their being taught by a DE but says > they learned loads. At least that's how I remember it--I don't have the > book to look it up. I have no idea how the kids would have found out, but > that scene seemed to suggest it was known by some people, including Dean the > Muggleborn. Geoff: Yes, you're right. I'd forgotten that bit. Quite interesting re- reading: '"I repeat," said Professor Umbridge, smiling in a very irritating fashion at Dean, "do you expect to be attacked during my classes?" "No, but -" Professor Umbridge talked over him. " I do not wish to criticise the way things have been run in this school," she said, an unconvincing smile stretching her wide mouth, "but you have been exposed to some very irresponsible wizards in this class, very irresponsible indeed - not to mention," she gave a nasty little laugh, "extremely dangerous half-breeds." "If you mean Professor Lupin," piped up Dean angrily, "he was the best we ever -" "Hand, Mr.Thomas! As I was saying - you have been introduced to spells that have been complex, inappropriate to your age group and potentially lethal. You have been frightened into believing that you are likely to meet Dark attacks every other day -" "No, we haven't," Hermione said, "we just -" "Your hand is not up, Miss Granger!" Hermione put up her hand. Professor Umbridge turned away from her. "It is my understanding that my predecessor not only performed illegal curses in front of you, he actually performed them on you." "Well, he turned out to be a maniac, didn't he?" said Dean hotly. "Mind you, we still learned loads."' (OOTP "Professor Umbridge" p.219 UK edition) From hickengruendler at yahoo.de Wed Jan 18 11:36:50 2006 From: hickengruendler at yahoo.de (hickengruendler) Date: Wed, 18 Jan 2006 11:36:50 -0000 Subject: Newbie, difficulty getting into OoP In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146649 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Sherry" wrote: > > Hi all, > > Thanks to my daughter's urgings, I finally started reading the HP > series and I am now starting Book 5...I read 1-4 in 2 weeks as I > could not put them down. I am finding, however, that I am having > a difficult time getting into this book...I wonder why. Any > suggestions? > > "ladyluck41" > Hickengruendler: You will find, that you are not the only one. Many readers had problems getting into OotP, particularly during the chapters in Grimmauld Place (though I am not one of them. It's actually my favourite book, particularly because of the part that plays in Hogwarts). May I ask how far you are? If you are still at the Grimmauld Place chapters I advise you to go on. I thought it boring in the beginning as well, but a particular storyline at the end of book 6 makes some of those scenes more important than they appear on first glance. Or do you have problems reading about Umbridge and what she did to some characters? If that's the case than I can't really console you, she's pretty much in the whole book (but like I said, she's definitely a reason why I love the book so much). But she is also getting a comeuppance and it gets pretty funny, when the otehrs strike back. If it is whiny Harry you can't abide, he's in the whole book as well (though a bit less in the later chapters). But I must say that I got quite fond of him as well, but only during my second reading of the book. From marilynpeake at cs.com Wed Jan 18 13:34:30 2006 From: marilynpeake at cs.com (Marilyn Peake) Date: Wed, 18 Jan 2006 13:34:30 -0000 Subject: Newbie, difficulty getting into OoP In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146650 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "hickengruendler" wrote: > > "Sherry" > I finally started reading the HP series and I am now starting Book 5...I read 1-4 in 2 weeks as I could not put them down. I am finding, however, that I am having a difficult time getting into this book...I wonder why. Any suggestions? > Hickengruendler wrote: > You will find, that you are not the only one. Many readers had > problems getting into OotP, particularly during the chapters in > Grimmauld Place (though I am not one of them. It's actually my > favourite book, particularly because of the part that plays in > Hogwarts). > > Or do you have problems reading about Umbridge and what > she did to some characters? If that's the case than I can't really > console you, she's pretty much in the whole book (but like I said, > she's definitely a reason why I love the book so much). Marilyn Peake writes: Beginning with The Goblet of Fire, the later Harry Potter books are quite different than the first three. Both The Order of the Phoenix and The Half-Blood Prince are definitely darker, and I think much more reflective of politics in the real world. I found that, if I stopped comparing the later Harry Potter books to the earlier ones, they were very rich and rewarding in their own right. I loved that Umbridge was introduced into the series because I think we've all known our share of Umbridges; it was so great to see that type of character in such an extreme form, kind of like a character I loved to hate. :) Best Wishes, Marilyn http://www.marilynpeake.com New Audio Book - The Fisherman's Son by Marilyn Peake FREE Audio Sample at: http://tinyurl.com/b4o93 or http://tinyurl.com/9sjjw Produced on a professional sound stage; read by Andrew Dollar. From maria8162001 at yahoo.com Wed Jan 18 13:33:32 2006 From: maria8162001 at yahoo.com (Maria Vaerewijck) Date: Wed, 18 Jan 2006 05:33:32 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Patronus characteristics (was Re: Cheating) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20060118133333.63027.qmail@web53205.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 146651 Andrea Grevera wrote: Luckdragon: > But if DD were entombed & unable to get out on his own and sending off a message via his patronus would it not say "get me out of here". Andie: I've been searching quick quotes for some canon on thoughts that I have and I came across this sentence from a JKR interview, "Harry, Jessica and me July 8, 2000. "...but once you're dead you're dead. No magic power can resurrect a TRULY (my emphasis) dead person." Is DD TRULY dead? Re-reading HBP, pg 609, "The locket they had managed to steal so many hours before had fallen out of DD pocket. It had opened, perhaps due to the force with which it hit the ground." Did DD open it on his slow descent and find that the horcrux was a fake and realized it would be better if everyone at the moment thought him dead so he could go after it again without LV knowing the he was alive? And if DD is TRULY dead then from JRK website, "Wizards have ways of making sure their voices are heard after their death." So I'm sure that one way or another Harry will receive help from DD. maria8162001: My point exactly. I have posted this answer a few times already about DD's death, faking his death, planned death, whatever, but the point I was trying to make was also like this, but he's not just going for the locket with horcrux but all the horcruxes, without interruption both from Voldemort and his followers and from the ministry of magic. Not all wizards can find magical traces the way DD does. And even if Hermione will help Harry, intellegent as she is she have no way of finding magical traces protecting the horcruxes. Nobody knows where DD was going and doing till the end of HBP except for Harry, Hermione and Ron. But I guess there was a purpose on why DD told Harry about the horcruxes aside from just find and destroy them, as he definitely did not say how to find them and destroy them, and where to find them. "Maria" From nobradors at hotmail.com Wed Jan 18 14:30:04 2006 From: nobradors at hotmail.com (nuriaobradors) Date: Wed, 18 Jan 2006 14:30:04 -0000 Subject: Newbie, difficulty getting into OoP In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146652 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Sherry" wrote: > > Hi all, > > Thanks to my daughter's urgings, I finally started reading the HP > series and I am now starting Book 5...I read 1-4 in 2 weeks as I > could not put them down. I am finding, however, that I am having > a difficult time getting into this book...I wonder why. Any > suggestions? > > "ladyluck41" Hi Sherry, My short answer to your question would be "because OP sucks". Of course, not a useful one. I understand you, though, as it's my least favourite in the series. I don't know quite why. Grimmauld Place is fine and I loved Capslock!Harry, but though OP has a collection of great moments, the book as a whole did not quite satisfy me. Oddly enough, HBP has a whole range of dreadful moments, but I totally loved it as a whole. I guess the only logical conclusion is you either like it or not, but even if you end up placing OP at the bottom of the HP top 6, you won't regret having read it - as it's crucial to book 6 plus, as Hickengruendler said, it gets better when you read it a 2nd time. Enjoy your HP experience! Nuri From katmac at katmac.cncdsl.com Wed Jan 18 14:31:19 2006 From: katmac at katmac.cncdsl.com (lagattalucianese) Date: Wed, 18 Jan 2006 14:31:19 -0000 Subject: Testrals, Patroni, and Animagi Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146653 La Gatta Lucianese: Sent the following to a friend off-list, then decided it would add to the general confusion if I posted it as well: I think there's a difference between a) seeing a Patronus and seeing a thestral (whether or not the Patronus is a thestral); and b) seeing a Patronus and being able to produce one. a1) The consensus seems to be right now is that a Patronus can probably be seen by any wizard, even if it is a thestral-Patronus, unless it is sent to a specific person, in which case it can be seen only by the sender and the recipient(s). a2) A thestral (assuming it's a real thestral and not a Patronus) can be seen only by someone who has experienced death. Theodore Nott, I suspect, can see thestrals because his father is a Death Eater, so he has had the opportunity to witness somebody dying, probably rather nastily. (EEK! Do they off people in front of their own kids?) b1) For seeing a Patronus, see a1. Theodore Nott could probably see a Patronus, but we don't know, because nobody has offered to produce one when he is around. b2) I doubt Theodore Nott can produce a Patronus, it being a skill usually peculiar to very advanced wizards. Harry is a special case. Then there is the rather gnarly issue of Patroni vs Animagi. I think everyone assumes, on the basis of James' Animagus form and Harry's Patronus, that if a wizard is an Animagus, his Animagus form and his Patronus are the same animal. But I'm not sure this is so. (a) Lupin isn't an Animagus (AFAIK), just a Werewolf, and we don't know for sure whether he can even produce a Patronus. Do we? Has he ever? On the train he used that hand-held flame to route the Dementors. (b) Sirius in Animagus form is a dog, but I don't think we've seen him produce a Patronus either, so we don't know whether he can, or (if he can) if his Patronus is also a dog. (c) Peter's Animagus form is a rat; we also don't know whether he can produce a Patronus (I'm guessing not; he's kind of a crappy wizard). (d) James' Animagus form is a stag; we don't see him produce a Patronus either; Harry does produce a stag Patronus, and thinks it's his dad, but in fact the stag Patronus is produced by Harry; we don't know whether Harry, at this point, has potential as an Animagus or not. (e) Tonks (if it is Tonks ;D) produces some sort of an animal Patronus which everyone assumes is a wolf because she's in love with Lupin, but we really don't know; heaven only knows what sort of animal, if any, Metamorphmagus Tonks is capable of turning into. (f) Dumbledore's Patronus is a phoenix; it may also be his Animagus form, if he has one. I am now going to take two aspirin an lie down in a cool room... From kchuplis at alltel.net Wed Jan 18 14:59:01 2006 From: kchuplis at alltel.net (Karen) Date: Wed, 18 Jan 2006 08:59:01 -0600 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Newbie, difficulty getting into OoP References: Message-ID: <003301c61c3f$b7656230$b301010a@ConsolidatedTelephone.local> No: HPFGUIDX 146654 Marilyn Peake writes: Beginning with The Goblet of Fire, the later Harry Potter books are quite different than the first three. Both The Order of the Phoenix and The Half-Blood Prince are definitely darker, and I think much more reflective of politics in the real world. I found that, if I stopped comparing the later Harry Potter books to the earlier ones, they were very rich and rewarding in their own right. I loved that Umbridge was introduced into the series because I think we've all known our share of Umbridges; it was so great to see that type of character in such an extreme form, kind of like a character I loved to hate. :) kchuplis: I read the first three at the request of a friend so she could talk about them. I thought they were good, entertaining, but book 4, specifically the moment LV said "Kill the Spare" and Cedric was dead with no mamby pamby dying speeches or chases or anything else, I sat up and went "whoa" this chick is not messing around. It repeaked my interest entirely. OoTP was satisfying for me in that Harry is The Angry Young Man. He acted like a real teen with a past. I really liked it. I can't say as I had trouble getting into it, but it wasn't until my second read that I really began to grasp its implications. This book on is a lot more layered and may take a bit to chomp into. I like that. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From nobradors at hotmail.com Wed Jan 18 15:00:59 2006 From: nobradors at hotmail.com (nuriaobradors) Date: Wed, 18 Jan 2006 15:00:59 -0000 Subject: Sword is a horcrux In-Reply-To: <20060116222509.8900.qmail@web31701.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146655 > Hamstermap wrote: > I don't remember but should go back through but others say that > when he attempted for a Hogwarts job for a 2nd time that as he > left he made a motion of his hand. What if before the "interview" > he had killed someone and as he left he used the horcrux "spell" > or whatever it was, only nonverbally I'm just assuming, and if he > did he knows it's in a safe place because all of the headmasters > would protect it. So, it would be a perfect place for it. What the book says: "Oh, you want to come back to Hogwarts, but you do not want to teach any more than you wanted to when you were eighteen. What is it you're after, Tom? Why not try an open request for once?" Voldemort sneered. "If you do not want to give me a job ?" "Of course I don't," said Dumbledore. "And I don't think for a moment you expected me to. Nevertheless, you came here, you asked, you must have had a purpose." For a second, Harry was on the verge of shouting a pointless warning: He was sure that Voldemort's hand had twitched toward his pocket and his wand; but then the moment had passed, Voldemort had turned away, the door was closing, and he was gone. "Why?" said Harry at once, looking up into Dumbledore's face. "Why did he come back? Did you ever find out?" "I have ideas," said Dumbledore, "but no more than that." "What ideas, sir?" "I shall tell you, Harry, when you have retrieved that memory from Professor Slughorn," said Dumbledore. ......................... "I would be prepared to bet ? perhaps not my other hand ? but a couple of fingers, that they be-came Horcruxes three and four. The remaining two, assuming again that he created a total of six, are more of a problem, but I will hazard a guess that, having secured objects from Hufflepuff and Slytherin, he set out to track down objects owned by Gryffindor or Ravenclaw. Four objects from the four founders would, I am sure, have exerted a powerful pull over Voldemort's imagination. I can-not answer for whether he ever managed to find anything of Ravenclaw's. I am confident, however, that the only known relic of Gryffindor remains safe." Dumbledore pointed his blackened fingers to the wall behind him, where a ruby-encrusted sword reposed within a glass case. Interesting theory. I thought fleetingly of it, but disregarded it for the same reason stated by Lia: > I'm wondering if a greater degree of ritual would go into the >making of a Horcrux, as opposed to it happening through a nonverbal >spell. But we can only guess about this one, right? as we certainly do not now how the soul piece is passed onto the object to become a horcrux. Lia: >JKR stated that the Hat is not one, as it draws too >much attention >to itself, and thus I can't imagine the sword being >connected to it >in any way. Yes, everyone knows the hat. But how many know the sword? Harry knows it because he's used it, but I haven't heard anyone else making allusions to it, and though harry's been in DD's office with other people, we've had no account (as far as I remember) of another person turning to admire the majestic sword. Lia: > I could be quite, quite wrong, but I somehow find it odd that >Harry would've pulled the sword out of the Sorting Hat if the sword >were a Horcrux. Considering the sword was used to fight a part of Riddle's soul itself, sounds indeed very unlikely. Yet we don't know how being a horcrux affects an object "normal" use. Could the locket and the ring be still used as ordinary jewels after made a horcrux without any side effects by the wearer? How different or alike are they to the diary? Depending on how this works, the sword could have been a horcrux and still serve its purpose of aiding a true gryffindor in peril. Now, considering LV fleeting visit to DD's office - what if it's the other way round? Perhaps the object to become a horcrux is 'marked' in advance by a spell, the when the murder is committed, a more complete ritual is performed on the corpse that allows the soul-piece to be transferred to the previously selected Horcrux. Ideas? Nuri From bartl at sprynet.com Wed Jan 18 15:46:09 2006 From: bartl at sprynet.com (Bart Lidofsky) Date: Wed, 18 Jan 2006 10:46:09 -0500 Subject: The Evil of Voldemort; Lily's choice In-Reply-To: <003301c61c3f$b7656230$b301010a@ConsolidatedTelephone.local> References: <003301c61c3f$b7656230$b301010a@ConsolidatedTelephone.local> Message-ID: <43CE62C1.2050208@sprynet.com> No: HPFGUIDX 146656 Karen wrote: > I thought they were good, entertaining, but book 4, > specifically the moment LV said "Kill the Spare" and Cedric was dead > with no mamby pamby dying speeches or chases or anything else, I sat > up and went "whoa" this chick is not messing around. Bart: It does establish Voldy as being thoroughly evil. A probable mistake in STAR WARS (aka STAR WARS IV) was to make the most overtly evil character Governor Tarkin instead of Darth Vader (for example, after Leia gives the information he has asked for, he destroys Alderaan anyway); Vader, in his actions, was more of a pragmatist; the reason why we consider him to be the major agent of evil is because we are told that he is. JKR, doesn't tell; she shows. Voldemort kills not only when there is something to be gained, but when there is nothing to be lost. Which, of course, brings up the question again; why did he give Lily the choice of living? Given Voldemort as one who gains pleasure in the suffering of others, the obvious theory was that his intent was to get Lily to give up Harry to save her own life (which, it appears, Voldy fully expected her to do), and THEN kill her anyway. Of course, there may be an ulterior motive, to be revealed in Book 7. Bart From agdisney at msn.com Wed Jan 18 16:36:22 2006 From: agdisney at msn.com (Andrea Grevera) Date: Wed, 18 Jan 2006 11:36:22 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Newbie, difficulty getting into OoP References: <003301c61c3f$b7656230$b301010a@ConsolidatedTelephone.local> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146657 Marilyn Peake writes: Beginning with The Goblet of Fire, the later Harry Potter books are quite different than the first three. Both The Order of the Phoenix and The Half-Blood Prince are definitely darker, and I think much more reflective of politics in the real world. I found that, if I stopped comparing the later Harry Potter books to the earlier ones, they were very rich and rewarding in their own right. I loved that Umbridge was introduced into the series because I think we've all known our share of Umbridges; it was so great to see that type of character in such an extreme form, kind of like a character I loved to hate. :) kchuplis: I read the first three at the request of a friend so she could talk about them. I thought they were good, entertaining, but book 4, specifically the moment LV said "Kill the Spare" and Cedric was dead with no mamby pamby dying speeches or chases or anything else, I sat up and went "whoa" this chick is not messing around. It repeaked my interest entirely. OoTP was satisfying for me in that Harry is The Angry Young Man. He acted like a real teen with a past. I really liked it. I can't say as I had trouble getting into it, but it wasn't until my second read that I really began to grasp its implications. This book on is a lot more layered and may take a bit to chomp into. I like that. Andie says: I hate to admit this but the first HP book that I read was OOTP. After I was finished I had no idea what I had read but I knew I was interested. That was when I went I purchased the set of 4 books, read each one & OOTP again. Since then I must have read the series at least 8 times & every time I find something new. Keep reading you'll be drawn into it without realizing how hooked you are. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From agdisney at msn.com Wed Jan 18 16:55:36 2006 From: agdisney at msn.com (Andrea Grevera) Date: Wed, 18 Jan 2006 11:55:36 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] The Evil of Voldemort; Lily's choice References: <003301c61c3f$b7656230$b301010a@ConsolidatedTelephone.local> <43CE62C1.2050208@sprynet.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146658 Bart: why did he give Lily the choice of living? Given Voldemort as one who gains pleasure in the suffering of others, the obvious theory was that his intent was to get Lily to give up Harry to save her own life (which, it appears, Voldy fully expected her to do), and THEN kill her anyway. Of course, there may be an ulterior motive, to be revealed in Book 7. Bart Andie: Maybe Voldy wanted to see if all mothers were the same. His mother, in his eyes, selfishly gave up her life and left Voldy to the orphanage. LV expected Lily be selfish too and to stand aside and save her life. Instead Lily did what Merope wouldn't or couldn't, she gave up her life so she could protect the life of her son and in doing so brought LV down with her. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From dossett at lds.net Wed Jan 18 16:56:10 2006 From: dossett at lds.net (rtbthw_mom) Date: Wed, 18 Jan 2006 16:56:10 -0000 Subject: Spies, Lies and Self fullfilling prophecies In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146659 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "pippin_999" wrote: > Pippin: > > The plot to frame Sirius was underway before > Godric's Hollow, from what Fudge and McGonagall say, so it's > almost certain that Voldemort, not Peter, was behind it. Pat: I don't disbelieve you, but could you provide canon for this? > > Yet if Godric's Hollow had gone as Voldemort had planned, framing > Sirius would have been pointless from the point of view > of protecting his spy --if the spy was really Pettigrew. LV couldn't > count on Sirius not getting a chance to tell his side of things, or > Dumbledore being distracted by the need to protect baby Harry! > > Pettigrew could hardly have continued to spy on the Order after being > outed as the Secret Keeper, or faking his own death, so why frame > Sirius at all? Pat: Sorry to be so behind, but Christmas put me back and I just haven't caught up yet! To answer the question here, why frame Sirius? Because, as we all know, the WW was at war, and LV could have felt that the added bonus of framing Sirius would accomplish two things for him: 1. by framing Sirius, he left Pettigrew's disguise a secret, enabling the rat to still work for him in his animagus form, and, 2. by 'outing' Sirius as the spy, he puts the Order in disorder: making everyone in the Order suspicious of each other, and thereby, less effective against him! Anyway, thanks for your defense of ESE!Lupin - I've always wondered just where you were coming from, and you do make an interesting case (I'm not converted, but I'm still interested!) Thanks, Pat From jlnbtr at yahoo.com Wed Jan 18 16:09:04 2006 From: jlnbtr at yahoo.com (Juli) Date: Wed, 18 Jan 2006 08:09:04 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Testrals, Patroni, and Animagi In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20060118160905.2578.qmail@web53114.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 146660 lagattalucianese a1) The consensus seems to be right now is that a Patronus can probably be seen by any wizard, even if it is a thestral-Patronus, unless it is sent to a specific person, in which case it can be seen only by the sender and the recipient(s). Juli: But how about when in GoF DD sends Hagrid a Patronus (scene with Barty Crouch Sr and Viktor Krum), Harry sees it. Also in HBP Tonks sends Hagrid a Patronus, Harry sees it and Snape takes it instead of Hagrid. a2) A thestral (assuming it's a real thestral and not a Patronus) can be seen only by someone who has experienced death. Theodore Nott, I suspect, can see thestrals because his father is a Death Eater, so he has had the opportunity to witness somebody dying, probably rather nastily. (EEK! Do they off people in front of their own kids?) Juli:I don't think so. I think in Jo's site she says (correct me if I'm wrong) that Theo Nott saw his mother die. I don't think it's got anything to do with his dad being a death eater. Neville can also see the threstrals, so can Luna, and AFAWK neither one of them is related to a DE! b1) For seeing a Patronus, see a1. Theodore Nott could probably see a Patronus, but we don't know, because nobody has offered to produce one when he is around. Juli: Perhaps they teach Patronus at the DADA NEWT classes? we know it's beyond Ordinarly Wizard Level (Lupin in PoA), so it could be a NEWT thing. b2) I doubt Theodore Nott can produce a Patronus, it being a skill usually peculiar to very advanced wizards. Harry is a special case. Juli: I think he should be able to do it. He seems like a good wizard (he's taking the same NEWT classes as HArry). All it takes for a Patronus is a happy thought (and the skill). So I don't see why Theo couldn't cast one. Then there is the rather gnarly issue of Patroni vs Animagi. I think everyone assumes, on the basis of James' Animagus form and Harry's Patronus, that if a wizard is an Animagus, his Animagus form and his Patronus are the same animal. But I'm not sure this is so. Juli: I agree with you. The animagus form is your inner self, your personality, and the Patronus is a protective figure. (a) Lupin isn't an Animagus (AFAIK), just a Werewolf, and we don't know for sure whether he can even produce a Patronus. Do we? Has he ever? On the train he used that hand-held flame to route the Dementors. Juli: We don't know if it was just a flame. By then we didn't know anything about Patronus so it could have been a Patronus. As a member of the Order he must know how to since it's their means of communication (which makes me wonder, how does Figgy communicates?). (b) Sirius in Animagus form is a dog, but I don't think we've seen him produce a Patronus either, so we don't know whether he can, or (if he can) if his Patronus is also a dog. Juli: It would be some shape he founds protective... Who knows what it could be. I think it's hinted that he can produce one because in OoP he tells Harry that he would have enjoyed a fight with dementors. Also is PoA he says he could haven't gotten past the dementos without a wand. (d) James' Animagus form is a stag; we don't see him produce a Patronus either; Harry does produce a stag Patronus, and thinks it's his dad, but in fact the stag Patronus is produced by Harry; we don't know whether Harry, at this point, has potential as an Animagus or not. Juli: Jo says that neither Ron, Hermione or Harry will become an animagi, for me that's final. (e) Tonks (if it is Tonks ;D) produces some sort of an animal Patronus which everyone assumes is a wolf because she's in love with Lupin, but we really don't know; heaven only knows what sort of animal, if any, Metamorphmagus Tonks is capable of turning into. Juli: but do you think her protective figure would be herself? Juli Aol: jlnbtr Yahoo: jlnbtr --------------------------------- Yahoo! Photos Got holiday prints? See all the ways to get quality prints in your hands ASAP. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From foxmoth at qnet.com Wed Jan 18 17:25:48 2006 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Wed, 18 Jan 2006 17:25:48 -0000 Subject: Spies, Lies and Self fullfilling prophecies In-Reply-To: <80f25c3a0601171844l1021dfffg3cdb75d074b12ff9@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146661 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, elfundeb wrote: > > Reviving a dead thread, I emerge from the shadows to make one of my > periodic challenges to ESE!Lupin. Pippin, are you still there? FWIW, I > agree with most of the points already made in his defense, and only have a > few to add this time around. > > Pippin: > I also tried to show was that it's canon that Snape and Sirius > both thought that Lupin was capable of cooperating with a murderer, > and however they came to that conclusion *they're not wrong*. > We saw Lupin about to help Sirius murder Pettigrew. > > Debbie: > But what Sirius believed was that Lupin was a spy, i.e., a traitor. Lupin's > willingness to help Sirius murder Pettigrew is the antithesis of betrayal; > it is a demonstration of loyalty to a friend who he has just discovered was > not disloyal at all. And Snape's belief that Lupin was assisting a traitor > reflects an assumption of continued loyalty within the MWPP group, not > betrayal. I just don't see how this fact leads to the conclusion that Lupin > would be willing to betray his closest friends. Pippin: Lupin was about to betray everything his closest friends believed in, everything for which they had fought, suffered and died. It's a poor way to honor their sacrifice. We can't even argue anymore that justice wouldn't have been served if he'd turned Peter in, since the head of the Wizengamot at the time was, it turns out, that unreliable Ministry bureaucrat Albus Dumbledore. > > Pippin: > You seem to agree with me that Lupin must have become > estranged from his old friends. But what would he do then, > this man who wants so much for people to like him? Where > else would he turn? He wasn't naive about Voldemort. But > he was, he admits, naive about other werewolves. It was > a dangerous time to go looking for new friends, or so > Hagrid told us in PS/SS. > > Debbie: > While I'll admit that it's odd that Lupin is not with the other Marauders in > the old Order photograph (though given the fact that the members rearrange > themselves so those at the back move to the front, I think it's possible > that Lupin was directly in front of the Potters, then moved behind). > Moreover, if there was any estrangement, I think it did not extend beyond > Lupin and Sirius (each thought the other was the spy). I don't see how he > would be susceptible to an invitation to spy on Dumbledore and James, to > whom he owes so much. (Sorry, Pippin, this last point is one I've made many > times before.) Pippin: There's more evidence of estrangement than the photograph. James must have thought Sirius's suspicion of Lupin was credible, or he would have wanted Lupin told about the switch. More than that, Sirius never confronted Lupin with his suspicions until the Shrieking Shack. Odd, if they were such close friends. Remember when Harry thought Hagrid had opened the Chamber of Secrets? He didn't get a chance to ask Hagrid about it, but he *was* going to. That shows up "each suspected the other but didn't know how to broach the subject" as the melodramatic contrivance it is. Sure they might hesitate for a while, as Harry did, but for an entire year? Lupin's history with the order is such a blank that any scenario is possible. But I can certainly imagine that he was getting more and more involved with the werewolves, identifying with their struggle against the Ministry, seeing that the Ministry was at the point of collapse, that his friends were *so* close to achieving their freedom...and all that was propping the Ministry up was the Order. People on this list have opined more than once that wizarding society is so corrupt that it doesn't deserve to be saved from Voldemort. Why shouldn't Lupin feel the same way? Or, alternatively, Lupin was passing information to the werewolves to protect them from the Ministry, without realizing that Voldemort could use the information to identify Dumbledore's Ministry contacts. Then Voldemort's agents threatened him with exposure as a DE sympathizer and blackmailed him into becoming their spy. Lupin went along with it thinking he could clever his way out of it somehow without having to confess to Dumbledore what he'd done. Then he found out about the prophecy and realized he'd have to choose between the Potters' lives and exposure as a villain -- that's why his boggart is really a prophecy orb. Or, Lupin never realized that information he was giving the werewolves was reaching Voldemort. He lied to himself about the possibility, told himself that Sirius was the spy, nobly resisted all efforts to recruit him -- until he thought he saw a chance to save Lily by giving Voldemort James. As Dumbledore says, many ideas, each more unlikely than the next...but it's equally unlikely that Lupin could be completely unmoved by the plight of his people, or that he couldn't get caught up once more in the cleverness of playing a game against Dumbledore, or OFH! fashion, against Dumbledore and Voldemort both, always telling himself when things went wrong that it wouldn't happen again. > > Debbie: > Pettigrew's defining characteristic, I think, is not his supposed lack of > magical skill, but his laziness. Of course, laziness often masquerades as > ineptitude, so it should not be surprising that Pettigrew is regarded as > "talentless" and "not in their league." However, a lazy wizard like > Pettigrew is capable of quality work if someone stands at his elbow to make > sure he doesn't lose focus and screw up. Pippin: So who was doing that, in the year that Peter operated unsuspected as the spy? Are you saying that Voldemort had another agent in the Order? There seems to be this idea that Peter's job as a spy would have been easy. I say balderdash! How easy do you think it would be to hide from *your* closest friends that you'd joined a terrorist outfit and were now a traitor? I think that would be hard even if your friends weren't counter- terrorist experts and suspicous that someone in the outfit was a fink. > > Pippin: > The murder of Cedric is ambiguous. Harry thinks Voldemort did it. > JKR said that "Wormtail" killed Cedric. > > But Wormtail is an *alias*. Like Discworld's Commander Vimes, I want to > throw my hands in the air at this point, and shout, "You recognized > him by his MASK?" The whole point of a mask is that *anyone* can > hide behind it. The whole point of an *alias* is that you don't know > who it is. I don't think we can be too sure she meant Peter. Especially > since, as loyal DDM!Snape supporters, we must believe that JKR is > highly, er, selective, about what she tells us. > > Debbie: > This argument might have more weight if Wormtail was a code name given to > him by Voldemort. As it is, lots of people know who Wormtail is. Lupin > knows, of course. "Sirius is Padfoot. Peter is Wormtail." Lupin tells us > in PoA. And so does Voldemort, who is on the other side. And Snape, too, > who has a foot in both camps. Given the generality of use of Wormtail, for > Wormtail to be someone else would be more than misdirection; it would be a > lie. Since Lupin was certainly right about the other three nicknames, and > Wormtail is used by so many people to describe Pettigrew (and to his > face), I think we are meant to understand that there is no other. Pippin: This argument might have more weight if the Marauder's Map, which *never lies*, had felt obligated to let us know that there were two Barty Crouches. Or if Harry hadn't once pretended his name was "Neville Longbottom" and again that his nickname was "Ronil Wazlib". > Carol: > I think he feigned friendship for a whole year without a qualm, all the > while passing information on Order members (starting, maybe, with > those he cared least about but working steadily toward the Potters. >> > Debbie: > Peter is a dreadful sneak, As for Dumbledore, I > imagine that Pettigrew would have steered clear of him generally, and since > Dumbledore is the type to let others think things out for themselves, would > not have forced his presence on him. Pippin: Er, how does a dreadful sneak feign friendship for an entire year without a qualm? Exactly how does a member of the Order of the Phoenix steer clear of Dumbledore? Peter would have been at Order meetings, where, presumably, the leakage of information was discussed. And I don't think Dumbledore follows the Harry Potter method of investigation: ie, decide on a suspect first, then link all the evidence you find to him. I think he'd be a bit more conventional, you know, decide on a pool of suspects and gather evidence about all of them. Even if he eliminated Peter on the grounds you suggest, he'd still want evidence about other people close to the Potters, and Peter would be asked about it. Peter's nervousness would give him away. Dumbledore would know that Peter was deceiving him...and he doesn't cut liars a break when he thinks they might be helping Voldemort. Pippin From pegdigrazia at yahoo.com Wed Jan 18 15:36:06 2006 From: pegdigrazia at yahoo.com (Peg DiGrazia) Date: Wed, 18 Jan 2006 07:36:06 -0800 (PST) Subject: The GoF Train Scene (was:Re: Humanity, Kant, Caricatures, and Draco) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20060118153606.40261.qmail@web42201.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 146662 Magpie: > Your suggestion that he doesn't know all this makes sense to me, but I think > there's a conversation between Umbridge and Dean where she refers to their > Death Eater teacher and Dean confirms their being taught by a DE but says > they learned loads. At least that's how I remember it--I don't have the > book to look it up. I have no idea how the kids would have found out, but > that scene seemed to suggest it was known by some people, including Dean the > Muggleborn. Peg: I think they all knew, or thought they knew, what happened by the end of the year simply because word gets around. No one has to make an official statement about something like Crouch!Moody for a group of hundreds of teenagers who spend all their time together to work it out for themselves, or at least to come up with rumors that turn out to be pretty close to the truth. I mean, Harry appears with Cedric's body, both Karkaroff and "Moody" disappear that same night, and a few days later DD tells you that LV killed Cedric... Even if you didn't know about Crouch, wouldn't you assume Moody had turned out to be a maniac? And if one student got an owl from a parent who works at St. Mungo's saying that Moody had been brought in for an examination (as I assume he would have been,) and didn't he look awful, all skin and bones and with a bald patch on the side of his head, that information would have travelled across the student body in a day. There's not much you can do to squelch the rumor mill. Peg From maria8162001 at yahoo.com Wed Jan 18 13:45:33 2006 From: maria8162001 at yahoo.com (Maria Vaerewijck) Date: Wed, 18 Jan 2006 05:45:33 -0800 (PST) Subject: When will the ministry start kicking butt and taking names? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20060118134533.27124.qmail@web53214.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 146663 Corey wrote: Hi Members. I haven't posted in a while. I'm just wondering when the MoM is going to start kicking butt and taking names. I mean, who have they arrested? Let's see. Being sarcastic in thinking. Stan Shunpike, a death eater. He's as much a DE as me! And Scrimgeour - while he's better than Fudge, he wasn't exactly honest with Harry. Well, that's my post. maria8162001 here: Do you actually expect the MoM to take action on that? Come on, in HBP the only thing they do is keep up appearances and go after Dumbledore(try to know what he's doing). Scrimgeour maybe better than Fudge but I don't see any evidence on that as he's actually doing the same mistakes, Fudge had done before. The only thing that counts on them is authority/power. Scrimgeour wants Harry to help them boost their morale(more of ego to me) but he wasn't willing meet him half way,to release the innocent(Stan). It's same o', same o' with MoM whoever the new minister would be except if it would be DD, then you'll see results. From maria8162001 at yahoo.com Wed Jan 18 14:33:09 2006 From: maria8162001 at yahoo.com (Maria Vaerewijck) Date: Wed, 18 Jan 2006 06:33:09 -0800 (PST) Subject: Mrs. Figg (Was: Dursleys) In-Reply-To: <004d01c61b96$d747f760$0201a8c0@betty9wiwuzem4> Message-ID: <20060118143310.20409.qmail@web53206.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 146664 SilverStag wrote: snip Mimbeltonia 13) Aberforth Dumbledore, perhaps... I don't buy muggle! or squib! Aberforth, but obviously can't disprove it. I do have an addition or two to the list. Don't forget Mr. Prentice and the neighbor that looks out the window across the street after Dung disapparates. As others have said, it doesn't seem likely that either of them will do magic, and I think Mr. Prentice has been named as just a normal muggle. maria8162001: Hey guys, I just had a thought. Are we certain Mrs. Figg is really a squib? Maybe she's just hiding under this name? Maybe she's acutally somebody that everybody thought him dead? As I was re-reading JKR's interview again she mentioned that we're going to find out more about Regulus Black in book 7. I was thinking, that maybe she is R.A.B/Regulus Black? Just a thought, as we're going to see more of her, I guess in book 7. Mrs. Figg and Aberforth are both members of the OOP. From xcpublishing at yahoo.com Wed Jan 18 18:14:02 2006 From: xcpublishing at yahoo.com (Cheryl) Date: Wed, 18 Jan 2006 18:14:02 -0000 Subject: CHAPDISC: HBP8, Snape Victorious Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146665 Discussion questions 1. This is the first mention of nonverbal spells in the book ***The whole nonverbal thing was quite evident in this book, but it just brought up more questions for me. Apparently there are three kinds of casting: 1) Verbal with wand 2) Nonverbal with wand 3) Verbal wandless - but what about a fourth possibility? Nonverbal wandless? We never see done, but if anyone could do it, I would expect DD to be able to pull it off. Once you became an expert at nonverbal spells, you would start to work on wandless spells. How hard would it be to progress to nonverbal wandless? 2. Harry despises himself for wishing there would be the sound of panic, people wondering what had happened to him. He has always hated his celebrity, but in this situation, it might have helped. ***As most celebritys discover sooner or later, there are perks to being famous. This is one of those times when it might actually have helped Harry out, and naturally he would wish for it, even if he felt guilty about it. Anything to help get him out of the situation. 3. Here we see Tonks jump off a moving train...Is this really Tonks? ***I was really hoping for a more sinister explanation to the whole Tonks scenario and to find out she was just wallowing in lovesick self-pity through the whole book annoyed the heck out of me. The thing that bothered me most about the train scene was - How did she know he was there? She saw the curtains, went inside, and said, "Wotcher Harry." He's still invisible! Did she magically see him in there? I don't think so! JKR should have at least had Tonks trip over him or something. She would show a bit of the old clumsiness then AND she would have a logical way of finding the invisible boy. 4. Some have said that we didn't see enough of Harry grieving for Sirius. ***Going back through the Seven Stages of Grief, I'm thinking Harry has already been through most of them: Shock, covered. Denial, been there, done that. Bargaining, I think this was where Harry ran around hoping Sirius had been turned into a ghost. Fear, he's still carrying a bit of this around with him. Anger, his willingness to firmly affix blame to Snape shows that he still has a lot of anger to get through. Despair seems to be the stage that Harry is sliding into now. And frankly, in the last few stages (Fear, Anger, and Despair) you don't have a lot of urge to communicate with anyone. And for Harry, growing up in a place where he needed to suppress nearly every single emotion, pouring out his feelings to anyone is going to be difficult. His upbringing forced him to be a very private person and I don't see that ever changing. 5. I just noticed this when working on this chapter and actually reading it in braille instead of hearing audio where I can't tell how a sentence is punctuated. Snape tells Tonks that Harry is "quite--ah- -safe in my hands." ***I think that was a specific dig at Harry. 6. Later in HBP, we learn that Tonks' patronus is now a wolf, and we're led to suspect it has changed because of her love for Remus. But here at this point, we don't know any of that yet. ***I was wondering how one can tell a glowing wolf from a glowing dog? They would look pretty darned similar. Even reading this again I was sure Snape thought her patronus was a dog in tribute to Sirius. How would he know she was in love with Lupin? Additionally, his "weak" comment didn't refer to the patronus, but to the caster. He would see the change itself as weak because (whether dog or wolf) it was done from longing and love. Like Voldemort, I don't think Snape has a really good grasp on the whole concept of love. 7. Whatever you think of that belief, why do you think Harry would so easily believe that Sirius would only rush off because he was taunted? ***See above. Anger is one of the stages of grief and Harry needs to BLAME someone. He blames himself. He blames Snape. He even blames Sirius for being stupid enough to leave the security of 12GP. 8. Did Snape see that Harry's face was covered in blood? ***I didn't catch this on the first read, but thinking back, I can see it unfolding like this: For some reason, Tonks was too depressed to bother cleaning up Harry after healing him. I don't think the patronus message said anything her healing him. Snape shows up, sees Harry bloody and hopes the little sucker WAS injured. A normal teacher would have said, "OMG, you're all bloody! Are you all right? Do you need healing?" Even if Harry was gushing blood from an obviously smashed nose, I can see Snape sitting back and waiting for Harry to ask for help. "You're late. Get moving." "Cadn't choo see by dnose is smashed?" "Hmmmm. So it is. Very well then, go to the hospital wing." I think Snape did see the blood and simply chose not to comment, figuring that Harry would ask for help if it was vital. Plus, if sweet little Tonks didn't clean Harry up, why should Snape? 9. Do you think Snape intercepted the patronus message before it could reach its intended recipient? ***It disturbs me to think that a patronus can be intercepted. If DD is sending a private message to McGonagall 10. Is there any significance to the fact that Trelawney is at the start of term feast? ***I'm sure there is. Trelawney had a pretty large presence in this book, so I'm sure she'll have a big part to play in this before it's over. 11. Toward the end of this chapter, we have two different situations with Ron, both that jumped out at me in different ways. First in the conversation with nearly Headless Nick, was this meant to be comic relief, or showing Ron's insensitivity? ***I actually saw this more as Ron getting rid of someone snoopy that was bothering Harry. Later, as Harry tells Ron the story of what happened on the train, he believes Ron shows his friendship by not laughing. Does this show anything about Ron's character, or is this just normal for any kid his age? ***I thought it was more odd that Harry expected Ron to laugh. There is nothing funny about being kicked in the face by one of your sworn enemies. Harry's expectation of laughter was likely due to his own feeling of stupidity for putting himself in that situation. 12. Throughout the book, Harry asks about Dumbledore's hand, and he is repeatedly told that he'll learn what happened later. ***This is JKR's way of torturing the reader. Either she didn't feel like writing out the whole scene or she wrote it and didn't have room for it in the book. I don't think we'll ever hear the story, which stinks because we don't have nearly enough information on the Horcruxes and I was hoping the story would give us a bit more insight. And Harry, also, of course. 13. Here is one of my favorite parts in the book, for surprise value, Dumbledore announcing Slughorn as Potions teacher. How did you react when you read Dumbledore's announcement of Slughorn as potions master? ***I was as shocked as Harry. As to why, I'm leaning toward Dumbledore putting Slughorn as Potions master so that Harry could continue to get potions training, something that might be useful in his fight against Voldemort. He also valued Snape as a teacher, so this way Snape would be forced to continue teaching Harry, albeit in another position. I was disappointed that we never had any scenes of the actual DADA classes. 14. Did you think about the DADA curse when you heard that Snape had the position? ***More importantly, what was DD thinking about the curse by putting Snape there? Where did he expect Snape to be next year? Undercover with Voldemort? Teaching potions again? I wish Harry had thought to actually ask these questions of DD when he had the chance. 15. How do you feel about Harry's savage comment that at least it means Snape will be gone by the end of the year? Did Harry's comment about keeping his fingers crossed for another death disturb you? ***In my opinion, Harry hates Snape even more than he hates Voldemort. Let's face it, LV's presence in Harry's life has been brief (although life-changing in nearly every instance) while Snape has been a living, breathing, in-his-face enemy for five long years. They have been enemies since the first instant their eyes met and Harry has never altered his initial impression of Snape regardless of how many authority figures have tried to change his mind. When someone is a constant irritant, especially someone with power over you, it's pretty natural to wish for them to be gone from your lives forever. And mean it. I think Harry meant it. 16. Do you think Dumbledore's specific mentioning of not wandering after bedtime is aimed at the trio in particular? ***Oh yes. Definitely. He knows it won't have any effect, but he feels it's worth mentioning. 17. When Harry tells Ron about the things he overheard Draco saying on the train, we see more doubt on the part of Harry's circle about his suspicions of Draco. Why doesn't Ron believe that Draco is up to anything? ***Because Harry and Draco have had the mutual hatred thing going for five years and neither of them have done anything particularly serious to each other. Let's face it, up to this book, Draco has been mostly a big bag of hot air spewing venomous comments into the wind. Whenever they did have a confrontation, Harry usually came out on top. In Ron's mind, this was simply another round in the Draco/Harry war, so why take it seriously? The very fact that it was Draco and not some other student made Harry's ideas suspect. Unfortunately, everyone around him held the same opinion. Nicky Joe From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Wed Jan 18 18:24:07 2006 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Wed, 18 Jan 2006 18:24:07 -0000 Subject: The GoF Train Scene (was:Re: Humanity, Kant, Caricatures, and Draco) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146666 > Betsy Hp: > I'm going a bit back in time to bring this forward. I ignored > SSSusan's post when it first came out because it branched off from > the point I was trying to make at the time, but this is interesting > to me because I recall my reaction being quite different. Rather > than anger, I felt pity for Draco in that scene. > > I think Draco was (is) going through something that I can only > compare to students at West Point at the beginning of the US Civil > War. People he admired are suddenly enemies. And people he > disliked are suddenly allies. > > Draco *liked* Cedric. I don't want to overstate it; they weren't > best friends or anything. But Cedric went up against and actually > managed to (at times) beat Harry Potter. Draco, I'm sure, cheered > for Cedric during the triwizard tournament. He even made buttons > for Cedric. Yes, part of that (the greater part, I'm sure) was to > get at Harry. But Draco deliberately sided with Cedric, and now > suddenly Cedric is dead and he's the enemy. > > Draco liked Krum. I imagine his hero worship was on par with > Ron's. Ron certainly intimates as much when he accuses Draco of > sucking up to Krum. When Draco wasn't cheering for Cedric, I'm sure > he was cheering for Krum. And it may have had nothing to do with > Harry. But then Krum was attacked and used by a Death Eater. So > now, Krum is the enemy. > > Draco *hated* Fake!Moody. And at first that was fine with Draco's > world view. Aurors are barbaric and evil. Except Fake!Moody turns > out to be a Death Eater, so suddenly the man who tortured Draco, the > man who attacked and used Krum, the man who helped kill Cedric, is > an ally. > > What must Draco have been going through? He's not had a chance to > speak to his father. He's only just found out that those he admires > are the enemy, those he hates and fears are his friends. The only > thing he can do is put a good face on it and fall back on his usual > bluster. And Harry and friends come through like aces and reassure > Draco that yes, the enemy are dishonorable and brutal. Alla: Hm, I am not going to touch on Draco's confusion about whether Fake! Moody is a friend or an enemy, others did it quite well, but I would like to know where in canon you found that Draco actually liked Cedric or Victor as PEOPLE, that he was actually seeking their friendship or something like that, as opposed to simply cheering them as someone who can beat Harry ( and sure those guys could have done that, no question about that). You acknowledge that at least in part Draco's liking of Cedric and Victor was to get at Harry, right? But where do you see that other part that Draco liked them for themselves? I don't buy Draco liking Cedric at all, IMO. One possibility why Draco could have liked Cedric was after observing him on Qudditch field, but Cedric plays the exact opposite of what Slytherin play - honesty and fairness. Why would Draco like him for that, if Slytherin's philosophy in Qudditch seems to be " cheat, cheat and cheat again"? IMO of course. Do you remember accidents of Draco and Cedric spending time together? because I honestly don't. In any event even though I don't buy at all that at the end of GoF Draco's world was shaken that badly ( I think Harry is the one who suffered trauma and shock, not Draco), let's suppose for the sake of argument that I buy it and at the end of GoF Draco is very emotionally distraught. I am not sure why because of that he needs to be pitied for what he DID while coming uninviting to Gryffs apartment and starting to make a mockery of Cedric's death. Does his action start to be less cruel because of him being distraught? Now, if Gryffs were seeking poor Draco out in the corridors and beat him up unsuspected, yeah, I would agree with you - BAD, very BAD. But Gryffs were minding their own business at that point. I don't find responding to provocation to be dishonorable action. But that is just me of course. JMO, Alla From foxmoth at qnet.com Wed Jan 18 18:36:31 2006 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Wed, 18 Jan 2006 18:36:31 -0000 Subject: Snape ignoring HP blood (was: CHAPDISC: HBP8) In-Reply-To: <43CDE7A9.8060308@btopenworld.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146667 Irene: > And for exactly the same reason Harry wouldn't answer truthfully even if > Snape had asked him if he was hurt. Pippin: Right. So Harry lies, and Snape uses legilimency, since this question of whether Harry is hurt is of such desperate importance, and poor Harry has to relive the whole humiliating experience. And Draco *still* doesn't get punished, because it happened before start of term and Draco didn't use magic to hurt Harry anyway. Not that I think Snape was deliberately being nice to Harry, or anything, but really, Harry was probably better off that Snape didn't pry. Tonks is a member of the Order and a public servant (as an auror) so it would have been her responsibility to tell the school if Harry needed help. She could have sent for a carriage or used side along apparation to get Harry to the gate a lot quicker -- so obviously she didn't think Harry needed any help. Snape knew all that, of course. Tonks would have put in her message that she was coming to the gate and approximately when she would get there, or how could she expect to get Harry through? It raises an interesting question though. Tonks couldn't get through the gate, but she shows up unexpectedly outside the RoR later on. How did she get there? AFAWK, besides Dumbledore himself, only Snape and Hagrid can open the gates and they would have told her that Dumbledore wasn't there. I'm wondering about that supposedly blocked secret passage behind the mirror, now. Peter knows about it (so does Lupin) and as we saw in CoS, blocked passages can be opened. Pippin From mandorino222 at yahoo.com Wed Jan 18 15:34:08 2006 From: mandorino222 at yahoo.com (mandorino222) Date: Wed, 18 Jan 2006 15:34:08 -0000 Subject: Dumbledore's Trusting Nature In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146668 Carodave wrote: > > In re-reading HBP (US edition), I noticed a comment regarding > Dumbledore's trusting nature. I can no longer find the > quote, but as I remember it, someone remarked that Dumbledore's > weakness is that he HAS to see the best in people. Not that he > looks for the best, or would like to believe the best, but that > he HAS to, which implies lack of choice in the matter. Of > course, I could be reading into this based upon his continued > trust of Snape and Malfoy in the face of all evidence, but it > struck me as an odd choice of wording. "mandorino222": I think that the point of that statement (said by Snape in chapter 2) is to illustrate the difference between the empire building techniques employed by Dumbledore and Voldemort. Voldemort, as Harry is told repeatedly, trusts/befriends no one, which gives no one the opportunity to betray him. Dumbledore, on the other hand, trust/befriends everyone, and hopes that the harm caused by occasionally trusting someone untrustworthy is not greater than the benefit gained by trusting all people. Dumbledore HAS to believe the best of people because that's his ticket. Once he starts to draw lines and cut people off, he undermines his own philosophy and becomes weaker as a result. You can't fight evil with evil (see Barty Crouch). From chewbacca98407 at yahoo.com Wed Jan 18 16:17:30 2006 From: chewbacca98407 at yahoo.com (chewbacca98407) Date: Wed, 18 Jan 2006 16:17:30 -0000 Subject: Testrals, Patroni, and Animagi In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146669 > La Gatta wrote: > Sent the following to a friend off-list, then decided > it would add to the general confusion if I posted it as well: > > Then there is the rather gnarly issue of Patroni vs Animagi. > I think everyone assumes, on the basis of James' Animagus form > and Harry's Patronus, that if a wizard is an Animagus, his > Animagus form and his Patronus are the same animal. But I'm not > sure this is so. Chewie now: Not sure if this helps in your discussion, but JK said in an interview that James Potters patronus was a nose biting teacup. I am trying to find the quote, and I think it was on the World Book Day chat interview. I know it is in the Quick Quotes Quill website somewhere....this thought led me to believe that James Potter possibly worked for or made products for Zonko's as his occupation. And one more point--can a patronus only appear to the intended recipient? I seem to remember that in the beginning of HBP Tonks sent a patronus to announce to Hagrid that she had Harry, and it was Snape that intercepted this msg. She stated herself that she intended the message to reach Hagrid. We know that squibs can see a patronus because Mrs. Figg stated that she saw "silver stuff" come out of Harry's wand as he attempted to fight off the dementors in book 5. But I totally agree with you about the younger Nott. I believe that while anyone that has experienced death can see the thestrals, like JK states, only advanced wizards usually can accomplish a patronus. The trial in book 5 was telling in that Madame Bones was quite astonished that Harry was able to pull off magic like this at his age and experience level. It must have been a topic of gossip at the ministry or the Owl examinor would not have mentioned it to him, nor given him the opportunity to prove it for bonus points. And I believe that it has been specifically stated by JK that wizards have no control over what animal they transform into. This was in one of the newest interviews...I will check on the exact quote. I am almost positive it is in the interview with Jim Dale. There is something similar it seems with the patronus. It seems to me that Tonks did not have control over what shape her patronus took, and that the change was a result of what her heart was dwelling on. Harry's turns into a stag....he does not dwell on memories of his father at all...hmmmm...I think there is a connection between love/emmotion and patronus form as well. Could a wizard without love cast one? Could be an indicator of Snape's true colors. From darkelflass at yahoo.com Wed Jan 18 17:23:34 2006 From: darkelflass at yahoo.com (DarkElfLass) Date: Wed, 18 Jan 2006 09:23:34 -0800 (PST) Subject: Newbie, difficulty getting into OoP In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20060118172334.48394.qmail@web53913.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 146670 Sherry wrote: > I am finding, however, that I am having a difficult time > getting into this book...I wonder why. Any suggestions? Keep reading. The payoff is definitely worth it. I was very skeptical and did not jump on the HP bandwagon until September, 2005. I'd seen the movies, but didn't get interested in the books until PoA (movie version). I liked the darker tone and must say that JKR's writing has been not only impressive, but wonderfully entertaining. I like how she keeps raising the stakes and doesn't keep repeating the same old drivel. I can't wait for the final book. DarkElfLass From hartsonthemove at yahoo.com Wed Jan 18 18:55:12 2006 From: hartsonthemove at yahoo.com (Kathy) Date: Wed, 18 Jan 2006 18:55:12 -0000 Subject: Mrs. Figg (Was: Dursleys) In-Reply-To: <20060118143310.20409.qmail@web53206.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146671 > maria8162001: > Are we certain Mrs. Figg is really a squib? Maybe she's just hiding under this name? Maybe she's acutally somebody that everybody thought him dead? As I was re-reading JKR's interview again she mentioned that we're going to find out more about Regulus Black in book 7. I was thinking, that maybe she is R.A.B/ Regulus Black? > Kathy Now: Hmmm... Well, that would certainly explain in a round about way why Crookshanks buddied up to Sirius in his animagi form since Crookshanks was bred by Figgy. That is an interesting idea. Kathy From coverton at netscape.com Wed Jan 18 19:14:17 2006 From: coverton at netscape.com (corey_over) Date: Wed, 18 Jan 2006 19:14:17 -0000 Subject: When will the ministry start kicking butt and taking names? In-Reply-To: <20060118134533.27124.qmail@web53214.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146672 > maria8162001 wrote: > Scrimgeour maybe better than Fudge but I don't see any > evidence on that as he's actually doing the same mistakes, > Fudge had done before. The only thing that counts on them is > authority/power. It's same o', same o' with MoM, whoever > the new minister would be except if it would be DD, then you'll > see results. Corey here. Maria, I don't think Dumbledore will be minister. Well obviously not, because he's dead. But I do agree with your quote that says "Dumbledore would do things differently." I think we can both agree on this. Scrimgeour would be a better minister than Umbridge! Your fellow member, Corey From foxmoth at qnet.com Wed Jan 18 20:05:22 2006 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Wed, 18 Jan 2006 20:05:22 -0000 Subject: Spies, Lies and Self fullfilling prophecies In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146673 - > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "pippin_999" > wrote: > > Pippin: > > > > The plot to frame Sirius was underway before > > Godric's Hollow, from what Fudge and McGonagall say, so it's > > almost certain that Voldemort, not Peter, was behind it. > > Pat: > I don't disbelieve you, but could you provide canon for this? Pippin: The conversation at the Three Broomsticks, PoA ch 10, shows that Sirius was already under suspicion. McGonagall says Dumbledore remained worried after he learned that Sirius would be the Secret Keeper. Fudge says that Sirius seems to have planned a declaration of support for You-Know-Who for "the moment of the Potters' death." Fudge was Junior Minister in the Department of Magical Catastrophes at the time and closely involved in the investigation -- he's not just quoting wild stories from the Daily Prophet here. But there can't have been any genuine evidence of Sirius being the spy, or of this declaration, so it must have been manufactured -- presumably by Voldemort. Dumbledore says the Ministry can detect a killing curse "The Ministry, on the other hand, knew at once that this was a wizard's murder." -- HBP ch 17. So the Daily Prophet was probably correct in saying that only one curse was responsible for the deaths. If Peter *did* perform the unheard of magical feat of killing twelve people with a single curse while holding his wand behind his back, he must have been thoroughly coached on how to do it. He doesn't seem capable of having come up with such original spell work on his own. Pippin previously: > > Yet if Godric's Hollow had gone as Voldemort had planned, framing Sirius would have been pointless from the point of view of protecting his spy --if the spy was really Pettigrew. LV couldn't count on Sirius not getting a chance to tell his side of things, or Dumbledore being distracted by the need to protect baby Harry! > > > > Pettigrew could hardly have continued to spy on the Order after being outed as the Secret Keeper, or faking his own death, so why frame Sirius at all? > > Pat: > > Sorry to be so behind, but Christmas put me back and I just haven't > caught up yet! > > To answer the question here, why frame Sirius? Because, as we all > know, the WW was at war, and LV could have felt that the added bonus > of framing Sirius would accomplish two things for him: > 1. by framing Sirius, he left Pettigrew's disguise a secret, > enabling the rat to still work for him in his animagus form, and, > 2. by 'outing' Sirius as the spy, he puts the Order in disorder: > making everyone in the Order suspicious of each other, and thereby, > less effective against him! > Pippin: Let's consider the situation if Godric's Hollow had succeeded (leaving aside the meta issue that there'd be no Harry Potter books!), Pettigrew is the one and only spy, and Lupin is loyal to Dumbledore. 1) Voldemort is still alive and kicking 2) The Order is still actively opposing him 3) James, Lily and Harry are dead 4) Peter frames Sirius as per canon Can Peter continue spying on the Order in rat form? Not for long. Once it becomes clear that the spy is still active, the hunt will be up again, and Sirius's story will get a hearing. Dumbledore will believe him, Lupin will confirm, reluctantly, that Peter was an animagus, and Voldemort's spy will be caught unless he flees back to Voldemort for protection, as Peter had to do in PoA. So, aside from getting Sirius briefly tossed into Azkaban, the frame job does Voldemort little good. On the other hand, if Peter also was framed, then the plan might have been for the real spy to eliminate him at the moment when he confronted Sirius, leaving said personage free to continue spying on the Order. Eventually Sirius's conviction would come into question, as above, but the Order would be on a wild goose chase for the supposed Rat animagus spy. Pippin From juli17 at aol.com Wed Jan 18 20:42:26 2006 From: juli17 at aol.com (juli17 at aol.com) Date: Wed, 18 Jan 2006 15:42:26 -0500 Subject: Snape ignoring HP blood In-Reply-To: <1137576493.1144.53334.m19@yahoogroups.com> References: <1137576493.1144.53334.m19@yahoogroups.com> Message-ID: <8C7EA86D38EEE10-9CC-1BE3@FWM-D32.sysops.aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 146674 Alla wrote: I snipped a lot, because that is my main point - I don't think that Snape CAN be confident that Harry does not need medical care at all. IMO of course. He does not just have a tricle of blood on his face, his whole face is bloodied. I think Snape should have checked, but of course he is Snape. It is just I cannot help but be amazed every time I see the new evidence of his cruelty.(IMO of course) I am just wondering how far he can go. I stated in my previous post that I believe that as of right now Snape does not want Harry dead ( and I do NOT think that he has altruistic reasons of course. But I obviously just speculating here), but in my speculative opinion if Harry experiences any kind of suffering less than death(or something that can lead to death as Crucio), be it physical or emotional, Snape will not do anything. Julie: As others have mentioned, Harry wiped some of the blood away, and it was dark outside despite the meager lantern light. I'm not disputing Snape might have seen that Harry's face was bloodied (if no longer bleeding). But we now have canon that Snape is something of a healer himself. I see no reason why he couldn't have immediately assessed that Harry was not seriously injured. And after Harry arrived in the Hall, it's not as if any other teacher rushed up to him and sent him to the hospital wing to be checked out, so there's no indication anyone else thought he was seriously injured. Looking at it another way, what if someone else had met Harry? Let's say McGonagall met him. What would she have done? I imagine she would have commented on Harry's face in a similar manner to Ron ("What happened to your face Potter?") Despite Harry's implication that he didn't reveal what happened to Snape because it was *Snape*, would he have been any more willing to reveal what happened to another teacher? He can't very well say "Draco stomped on my face" without McGonagall wanting to know more. And once Harry tells McGonagall he was hiding under his invisibility cloak listening to Draco's private conversation, much of McGonagall's sympathy would be gone, and she'd lecture Harry. I do think McGonagall would have let (or ordered) Harry to clean himself up before going into the Hall, but I don't see that she would have done anything else differently than Snape did, including sending Harry to the hospital wing unless there was further evidence of injuries mentioned by Tonks or Harry. Still, it all comes down to "you say tom-a-to, I say to-mah-to" when it comes to Snape, doesn't it? Whether you see him as primarily motivated by hatred of Harry and a desire to see him suffer, or by a desire to prepare Harry for his confrontation with Voldemort by any means possible including stamping out all arrogance Snape perceives in the son of his hated enemy. Whichever way you view him, it's natural to intepret his actions to support that view. Which is why I do think while Snape has little concern for Harry's minor injuries and emotional hurts, he would get him to the hospital wing if he had any belief Harry might have more serious injuries (not just if he was in danger of dying). Julie [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Wed Jan 18 21:13:56 2006 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Wed, 18 Jan 2006 21:13:56 -0000 Subject: Snape ignoring HP blood (was: CHAPDISC: HBP8) In-Reply-To: <43CDE7A9.8060308@btopenworld.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146675 Irene: > Anyway, since when patient's opinion counts for anything? Non- verbal > diagnostic spell, now, that's different. So who do you know Snape didn't > run it? :-) Alla: Good point. Snape could have run it, I guess, but would not have Harry felt something if spell was touching him, diagnosing him or something? Shaun: > But looking again, what does Snape actually see? > Yes, Hermione says he's covered in blood. Personally, I think it's > likely she's exaggerating a bit, given Harry has attempted to clean > his face. Alla: I snipped the quotes, sorry, it is just my reply would be brief and I did not want to leave them all in. No, I don't think Hermione is exaggerating and I see nothing strange if Harry cleaned up himself a bit and still had a lot of blood left. Shaun: > And, I agree that I doubt Harry would ask Snape for help in such a > situation. But that is Harry's failure and Harry's responsibility. Alla: It IS Harry responsibility to ask for help, but it is NOT IMO primarily Harry's failure that he cannot bring himself to ask Snape for one. Snape IMO set himself up as Harry's enemy. If it is an act, which I really don't buy especially after HBP ( Snape IMO has no audience to act for, when he screams "you and your filthy father". IMO that reflects his very genuine feelings towards Harry or James or both of them), then it is a very convincing one IMO and I certainly don't think that Harry can be blamed too much if it turns out that Snape is really his friend and ally. :-) I think we are in agree to disagree area now. :-) JMO, Alla From katmac at katmac.cncdsl.com Wed Jan 18 21:26:16 2006 From: katmac at katmac.cncdsl.com (lagattalucianese) Date: Wed, 18 Jan 2006 21:26:16 -0000 Subject: Newbie, difficulty getting into OoP In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146676 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Sherry" wrote: > > Hi all, > > Thanks to my daughter's urgings, I finally started reading the HP > series and I am now starting Book 5...I read 1-4 in 2 weeks as I > could not put them down. I am finding, however, that I am having > a difficult time getting into this book...I wonder why. Any > suggestions? > > "ladyluck41" > La Gatta Lucianese: I have no idea. It ties with _Prisoner of Azkaban_ as my favorite HP, bcause of the background on Sirius and his family (I have a mother like that, so I can relate), the Umbridge-you-love-to-hate (who can resist that bit where the Terrible Twins celebrate her first day as headmistress), and all the backstory on Snape. I adored the DA classes and Dumbledore's grand exit. The first two books really are children's books--wonderful children's books, but children's books. I never really got off on _Goblet of Fire_, I think because I find competitive sports such a dead bore, ditto teenage angst, and _Half-Blood Prince_, though it has many wonderful moments, has serious structural flaws (like the back end sort of fell off the loading dock). From kfreimu at gmail.com Wed Jan 18 21:44:13 2006 From: kfreimu at gmail.com (Krista Freimuth) Date: Wed, 18 Jan 2006 15:44:13 -0600 Subject: Newbie, difficulty getting into OoP In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <977182740601181344j55913fden232b5ef5ca21a819@mail.gmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 146677 "Sherry" wrote: > Thanks to my daughter's urgings, I finally started reading the HP > series and I am now starting Book 5...I read 1-4 in 2 weeks as I > could not put them down. I am finding, however, that I am having > a difficult time getting into this book...I wonder why. Any > suggestions? I have been reading HP since book 3 came out & devoured the first three in an 8 hr trip out & back over Thanksgiving that year. Since then, I've eagerly anticipated the new books. However, when OOTP came out, I also had a really hard time getting into the book. What I figured out was that it was depressing - it was like nothing good was happening to Harry until close to the end. When I read it a second time, again I had a problem getting through it quickly - it wasn't as depressing the second time around though. Just keep plodding through it - it does get better! And HBP is well worth the wait! Krista From katmac at katmac.cncdsl.com Wed Jan 18 22:52:11 2006 From: katmac at katmac.cncdsl.com (lagattalucianese) Date: Wed, 18 Jan 2006 22:52:11 -0000 Subject: The Evil of Voldemort; Lily's choice In-Reply-To: <43CE62C1.2050208@sprynet.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146679 > > Bart: ... > > ...Given Voldemort as one who gains pleasure in the suffering of > others, the obvious theory was that his intent was to get Lily to > give up Harry to save her own life (which, it appears, Voldy fully > expected her to do), and THEN kill her anyway. Of course, there may > be an ulterior motive, to be revealed in Book 7. > La Gatta Lucianese: Or perhaps to leave her alive and use her guilt over Harry's death (and James' death too, in that he would have died for nothing) to manipulate her into giving him something he wanted (information, the prophecy orb, who knows). Granted he could have put an Imperius Curse to control her, but speaking as the sometime victim of a master manipulator and guilt-tripper, I think he would have found using her guilt and her misery to make her do his will much more satisfying. From horridporrid03 at yahoo.com Wed Jan 18 22:58:43 2006 From: horridporrid03 at yahoo.com (horridporrid03) Date: Wed, 18 Jan 2006 22:58:43 -0000 Subject: The GoF Train Scene (was:Re: Humanity, Kant, Caricatures, and Draco) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146680 > >>Carol: > Sorry for snipping most of your interesting post, which certainly > presents the incident from a perspective that never occurred to > me--nor, I would guess, to most of the people on this list. Betsy Hp: Snipping is good! And I'm glad I brought a new perspective forward for you. I was thinking about how much Draco's world view must have changed in HBP (your talking about his disrespect towards, and lack of trust for, Snape started me down that road) while also thinking about how differently SSSusan and I approached the GoF train scene and the position of the young cadets at West Point suddenly jumped out at me. Especially as honored and respected professors started taking sides. > >>Carol: > But I wonder if Draco ever found out that Fake!Moody was Barty > Crouch Jr. (whom he, like everyone else, would have thought dead, > if he knew about him at all). > Betsy Hp: I don't know that Draco (or any of the students) would have known *exactly* who Fake!Moody really was, but that he was fake was probably well known by the Leaving Feast. And that the Fake!Moody was a Death Eater was probably also known. Magpie and Geoff brought up that Dean knew this fact in OotP before Harry told his version of events. And, considering that McGonagall and Fudge had a screaming fight (with Snape singing back-up) from the DADA office to the hospital wing after Fudge had Barty soul- sucked, I'm reasonably confident that the various portraits and ghosts picked up tons of grist for the school rumor mill. > >>Sue: > I'd just like to add to this that Draco has no reason to like Fake! > Moody even if he knew the truth, because Barty Junior is no friend > to him - he hated Death Eaters who went free, remember? > Betsy Hp: I don't think Draco was that familiar with the byzantine politics of the Death Eaters. I'm betting that he (like Harry pre-GoF) saw the world in pretty black and white terms. There were the good guys, who stood with his father and Voldemort, and there were the bad guys who stood against them. I doubt Lucius wrote Draco a long letter explaining that some Death Eaters were friends, and others not so much (but still better than non-Death Eaters!) before Draco left Hogwarts that year. And I'll even go so far as to say that I doubt Draco would find that sort of explanation all that comforting if Lucius did sit him down once he got home. > >>Carol: > So while I understand the point you're making about Draco's world > suddenly turning upside down, I wonder if he really knew as much as > you seem to think he does about Fake!Moody's real identity or even > about Krum being attacked and used by him. > Betsy Hp: Well, as I said above, I think the entire school realized that something hinky was up with Fake!Moody and that he'd been working against Dumbledore. I don't know that everyone knew exactly what happened to Krum in the maze, but it seems pretty obvious at the Leaving Feast that he wasn't thrilled with what happened in there. And he does make it clear to Harry that he's against Voldemort. I'm pretty sure Draco could and probably would pick up on that. Draco doesn't need to know specifics. (He may actually flinch away from learning them. The facts would not be of any comfort, and I think he's smart enough to be aware of that.) But I think it was pretty easy to see who stood on what side by the time of the Leaving Feast. And Dumbledore deliberately brings up Voldemort to further drive the point home. Draco notices this enough to comment. (Was he trying to reassure Crabbe and Goyle?) > >>Alla: > > ...I would like to know where in canon you found that Draco > actually liked Cedric or Victor as PEOPLE, that he was actually > seeking their friendship or something like that, as opposed to > simply cheering them as someone who can beat Harry... > Betsy Hp: Oh, I'm not trying to take it that far. Though, when it comes to Krum (Durmstrang attending, dark arts knowing, Quidditch champion Krum), I'm quite positive Draco would have *loved* to become a close friend. (Ron comments on Draco's sucking up when Durmstrang first arrives.) Even then, however, I wouldn't say I could prove Draco was interested in Krum as a *person*. Simply cheering for them is enough, IMO. Draco saw something worthy in both boys: Cedric for being the "real Hogwarts champion", and Krum for being Krum. He put effort into supporting them and I'm sure that if asked, he could have listed positive traits about both of them. > >>Alla: > > I am not sure why because of that he needs to be pitied for what he > DID while coming uninviting to Gryffs apartment and starting to > make a mockery of Cedric's death. Does his action start to be less > cruel because of him being distraught? > Betsy Hp: For me, yes. It's why I pity him and why I see him as something more than a horrible little boy. He did have a *need* to confront Harry. He had to try and get his equilibriam back, otherwise he'd have to start questioning his father's judgment. And once Draco started down that path he might not be able to stop until he completely broke with his family. And that would be something I think Draco would do almost anything to avoid. Betsy Hp From gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk Wed Jan 18 23:03:58 2006 From: gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk (Geoff Bannister) Date: Wed, 18 Jan 2006 23:03:58 -0000 Subject: The GoF Train Scene (was:Re: Humanity, Kant, Caricatures, and Draco) In-Reply-To: <20060118153606.40261.qmail@web42201.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146681 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Peg DiGrazia wrote: Peg: > I think they all knew, or thought they knew, what happened by the end of the year simply because word gets around. No one has to make an official statement about something like Crouch!Moody for a group of hundreds of teenagers who spend all their time together to work it out for themselves, or at least to come up with rumors that turn out to be pretty close to the truth. I mean, Harry appears with Cedric's body, both Karkaroff and "Moody" disappear that same night, and a few days later DD tells you that LV killed Cedric... Even if you didn't know about Crouch, wouldn't you assume Moody had turned out to be a maniac? And if one student got an owl from a parent who works at St. Mungo's saying that Moody had been brought in for an examination (as I assume he would have been,) and didn't he look awful, all skin and bones and with a bald patch on the side of his head, that information would have travelled across the student body in a day. There's not much you can do to squelch the > rumor mill. Geoff: This correlates with what happened at the end of the "Philsopher's Stone": 'Harry swallowed and looked around him. He realised he must be in the hospital wing. He was lying in a bed with white linen sheets and next to him was a table piled high with what looked like half the sweet- shop. "Tokens from your friends and admirers," said Dumbledore, beaming. "What happened down in the dungeons between you and Professor Quirrell is a complete secret, so, naturally, the whole school knows...."' (PS "The Man with Two Faces" p.214 UK edition) Sounds a bit like our Secret Service.... :-) Mark you, the rumour mill can, like Burns' mouse "gang aft agley".... Some information became subject to a little artist's licence: 'The notices had gone up all around the school overnight but they did not explain how every single person within the castle seemed to know that Dumbledore had overcome two Aurors, the High Inquisitor, the Minister for Magic and his Junior Assistant to escape. No matter where Harry went within the castle, the sole topic of conversation was Dumbledore's flight and though some of the details may have gone awy in the retelling (Harry overheard one second-year girl assuring another that Fudge was now lying in St.Mungo's with a pumpkin for a head) it was surprising how accurate the rest of their information was. Everybody knew, for instance, that Harry and Marietta were the only students to have witnessed the scene in Dumbledore's office and, as Marietta was now in the hospital wing, Harry found himself besieged with requests to give a first-hand account.' (OOTP "Snape's Worst Memory" p.550 UK edition) From gav_fiji at yahoo.com Wed Jan 18 23:43:23 2006 From: gav_fiji at yahoo.com (Goddlefrood) Date: Wed, 18 Jan 2006 23:43:23 -0000 Subject: Ministry Inaction? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146682 > Corey wrote: > I'm just wondering when the MoM is going to start kicking butt and taking names. I mean, who have they arrested? Goddlefrood says: The Ministry appears ineffectual, however it has cleaned up twice after the Order of the Phoenix. Once at the Department of Mysteries and once after the skirmish at Hogwarts. Those (hopefully) in custody include elevne Death eaters from the DoM (all except Bellatrix) and I belive Greyback, the brutal faced Death Eater (probably Yaxley) and one other. Additionally Gibbon has been killed, admittedly not by the Ministry. Perhaps what we should discuss is what more the Ministry could do against a deranged bunch of fanatics whose skills are the equal or possibly superior to those working for the Ministry. From bboyminn at yahoo.com Wed Jan 18 23:41:31 2006 From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Wed, 18 Jan 2006 23:41:31 -0000 Subject: Newbie, difficulty getting into OoP In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146683 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Sherry" wrote: > > Hi all, > > Thanks to my daughter's urgings, I finally started reading the HP > series and I am now starting Book 5...I read 1-4 in 2 weeks as I > could not put them down. I am finding, however, that I am having > a difficult time getting into this book...I wonder why. Any > suggestions? > > "ladyluck41" > bboyminn: I too found it harder to keep my focus while reading OotP and HBP. To some extent I can make allownances though. GoF, my favorite book, was written at the peak of JKR's creative expanse. At that point she could go anywhere and do anything without limit, but now with book 5 and book 6 she has to start closing down the story. It is like GoF was the wide end of a funnel and book 7 will be the narrowest end. She doesn't have the freedom to expand the story without limit. In fact the story, as I said, must contract. She has specific clues that need to be laid, and specific things that must be said, and that restricts where the story can go. Now, after some time has passed and we are away from the hype and anticipation, I find a leisurely read of OotP and HBP very enjoyable. In fact, I just finished HBP last night and I found the final scene very moving. Even though the last two books are not as captivating and enthralling as the previous books, they are still good books, and I'm sure you will find that later slower reads will indeed be rewarding. JKR's worst book, is still better than 90% of the drivel that is published. As a side note, I would say that CoS and HBP are my /least/ favorite stories, but Chris Rankin (Percy Weasley in the Movies) rated CoS and HBP are the best stories in the series. So, to some extent, it is a matter of taste. CoS and HBP had what Chris looks for in a story; perhaps he likes darker mysteries, whereas I like action/adventure. The point is that you would have to be inhumanly strong to stop reading the series now. Regardless of the lower mood in HBP and OotP, I still can't wait to find out what happens next. So, I say keep reading and you will find a good story there as a whole, even if parts of it drag a bit. Just a thought. Steve/bboyminn From a_svirn at yahoo.com Thu Jan 19 01:02:49 2006 From: a_svirn at yahoo.com (a_svirn) Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2006 01:02:49 -0000 Subject: The GoF Train Scene (was:Re: Humanity, Kant, Caricatures, and Draco) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146684 > > Betsy Hp: > > Draco *liked* Cedric. I don't want to overstate it; they weren't > > best friends or anything. > Alla: > > Hm, I am not going to touch on Draco's confusion about whether Fake! > Moody is a friend or an enemy, others did it quite well, but I would > like to know where in canon you found that Draco actually liked > Cedric or Victor as PEOPLE, that he was actually seeking their > friendship or something like that, as opposed to simply cheering them > as someone who can beat Harry ( and sure those guys could have done > that, no question about that). a_svirn Personally I never noticed Draco liking Cedric either. But suppose ? for the sake of argument ? that he did. I find he chose a very strange way of showing it. All that jeering and sneering at the leaving feast, all that "Diggory was the first, you'll be the second". Honestly. If that's how he treats people he *likes* I'd say he certainly has the making of a fine Death Eater. From a_svirn at yahoo.com Thu Jan 19 01:17:19 2006 From: a_svirn at yahoo.com (a_svirn) Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2006 01:17:19 -0000 Subject: The GoF Train Scene (was:Re: Humanity, Kant, Caricatures, and Draco) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146685 > Carol: > It's unclear just how much the spectators saw from the stands. Did > they realize that Krum had Crucio'd Cedric and that Harry had to stun > him? If so, do they wonder why Krum isn't in Azkaban? a_svirn: I suspect they saw nothing from the stands. Surely Dumbledore would have stepped in at this point? If this seems an odd sort of entertainment, look at the second task. They certainly saw nothing of the proceeding. Just sat there at the lake and gaped at its smooth surface. I really wonder what Bagman found to comment upon. From bboyminn at yahoo.com Thu Jan 19 01:34:25 2006 From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2006 01:34:25 -0000 Subject: CHAPDISC: HBP8, Snape Victorious In-Reply-To: <002a01c61ab8$b41be730$0400a8c0@pensive> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146686 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Sherry Gomes" wrote: > > CHAPTER DISCUSSIONS: Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince, Chapter 8, > Snape Victorious > > Summary: > > ...edited... > > H > > > Discussion questions > > 1. This is the first mention of nonverbal spells in the book, > though it becomes important later as we know. ... > bboyminn: This is the first mention of nonverbal spells but it's not the first example. We have seen several nonverbal spells throught the series, and it has been discussed in the past, so I always assumed it was coming and wasn't at all surprised. > 2. Harry despises himself for wishing there would be the sound > of panic, people wondering what had happened to him. ... Later > in the chapter, when he is at the Gryffindor table ..., he > hopes the students will just assume he was off doing something > heroic. bboyminn: I think this is a case of 'where is it when you need it'? Harry has always hated his fame; the pointing and staring, and all the attention. But now the one time he could actually use his fame, the one time that it could actually do him some good, it's not there. He assumes no one is wondering or worrying where the famous Harry Potter is. Of course, that is not true. It seems as if Tonks was at the train station to guard him, and when he didn't get off the train, she went to investigate. Of course, Harry doesn't think of that, he simply sees it as being caught in an embarassing stituation by a friend. As to his feeling expressed in the Great Hall, I think they are very natural. No one wants the world to know that they did something foolish and someone else, especially an enemy, got the better of them. So once again, Harry is hoping his reputation will help him salvage some dignity. Instead of being off acting the fool, Harry hopes every will assume he was up to something brave. Any teen, given a choice between seeming foolish and brave, will certainl choose brave every time. > 3. Here we see Tonks jump off a moving train. All through the > last book, OOTP, we are shown how clumsy Tonks is. ... What did > you think of this? We learn later that Tonks has lost her > metamorphmagus ability. Do you think her ability to change her > appearance could be part of why she is clumsy? bboyminn: First, Tonks is clumsy but she is not a total 'spaze' (spastic). She is able to walk, and talk, and hold down a job, and function like a normal person. It's not like she is crippled by clumsiness. She is also an Auror, so while generally clumsy, she was able to get through the apparently rigorous training to be an Auror. Again, she is not clumsy to the point on non-functional. I do like the idea as suggested here and expanded on by others, that because Tonks is always changing form, much like a teenager, she never become used to her body. Teenagers tend to be clumsy because their body awareness and preception can't keep up with the rate of body change, so they are never quite fully aware of where there hands and feet are. Now that Tonks, is not morphing as often, her body has gotten used to the size and shape she has assumed. Also, as others have pointed out, I think to some extent her clumsiness is amplified by her over enthusiastic personality. She is so quick and eager to act that her body gets there before her brain, and she knocks things over. > 4. Some have said that we didn't see enough of Harry grieving > for Sirius. What do you think of this scene, with Harry's > thoughts about Tonks and his inability to talk to her about > Sirius? Does this show his grief to you? > bboyminn: I think to the extent that it is possible in fiction, JKR has created very real-life characters and situations, and that is part of the appeal of the books. In real-life there really aren't that many dramatic heart-to-heart grief expressing discussion. Mostly, we just stoically muddle through. However, I think we get a sense of Harry's inner feelings. To talk of Sirius, to express his grief, brings up a pain he is not willing or able to face; just like real-life. Our own thoughts are never as painful as when they are expressed in words. When my father died, I could muddle through just fine with my thoughts of him, but if we began to talk about him and express fond feeling, the pain welled up with an unbearable strength. I think this is what Harry is trying to avoid, he knows if he verbalizes his feelings, he will have to face that unbearable pain. So, yes, just like real-life, I think Harry's avoidance of any discussion of Sirius, reflects a deep and powerful pain lurking under the surface. > 5. ... Snape tells Tonks that Harry is > > "quite--ah--safe in my hands." > > Is there any implication in his words here, ...? Or for Tonks? > Just curious... > bboyminn: Snape is well aware of Harry's total dislike and even hatred of him, and he takes great delight in rubbing it in. This is just Snape making a miserable 'dig' at Harry feelings. > 6. Later in HBP, we learn that Tonks' patronus is now a wolf,... > Why do you think Snape made these comments about her patronus? > ... Why does he say that her patronus is weak? What do you think > about the whole significance of the changing patronus? > ... bboyminn: Snape is just a big meanie. I don't think he cares one way or another about Tonks, but he can't resist a chance to put down one of the Marauders. While his intended slight was toward Remus, we see that Tonks, already vulnerable from her unreturned love or Remus, is very hurt by Snape's comment. It was a very mean and cruel thing to do, but not entirely out of character for Snape. > 7. We've discussed Harry's hatred of Snape over Sirius death > many times in the past, ... Harry believes that the reason Sirius > rushed off to the ministry was because of Snape's taunts. ..., > why do you think Harry would .. believe that Sirius would only > rush off because he was taunted? Does Harry have difficulty > believing that Sirius could have rushed to his rescue out of love > for him ...? Does Harry have a problem believing that people > could love him enough to risk their lives? > bboyminn: Excellent question. It has to be a very heavy cross for Harry to bear to know that so many people willingly died to save him. In his quiet alone moments I can't help but believe that Harry asks himself why? Why are these people so willing to die for me? Why do this people think that I, a mediocre student, just an ordinary guy, am worthy of that sacrifice. And I can't help but believe that Harry doesn't see himself as worthy. I'm sure he would gladly have died so that Sirius and his parents could have had long happy lives. But, in a way, it is that very sense of self-sacrifice that makes Harry worthy of dying for. His very desire to sacrifice himself for others, makes him worthy of being sacrificed for. Also, never having had affectionate affirmations of physical (non-sexual) love in his life, I think Harry has a great deal of difficulty think of other people as loving him. Liking him sure, but I don't think he really is able to comprehend the depths of Ron, Hermione's or Ginny's love for him. He doesn't have enought of a life foundation or models for him to understand that depth and expression of love. So, you are right, it would be difficult for Harry to think that Sirius ran to the rescue simply because he loved Harry. Of course, Sirius had his own more personal reason for rushing to the rescue, but love of Harry was probably right at the top of the list. > 8.... Did Snape see that Harry's face was covered in blood? ... > ..., why didn't he comment ..., that something must have happened > to Harry on the way? ... Were his snarky comments to Harry on the > walk up to the castle just the usual routine, ..., or does he still > seriously hate him so much? > bboyminn: Snape can size up a situation very quickly. He sees that neither Harry or Tonks are upset or concerned, so why should he be concerned? I think his snarky comments are his usual Harry vitriol. He has never treated Harry kindly or even politely, no reason to start now. As to not allowing Harry to use the invisibility cloak, I think the was just to humilate Harry. Any excuse to take Harry down a notch or two is never missed. > 9. Hermione tells Harry that Hagrid was only a few minutes late, > yet Snape had said that Tonks' message to Hagrid couldn't reach > him, because Hagrid was late, and that was why, he, Snape, had > taken the message instead. Was this true? > bboyminn: I addressed this one specific issue (nature of Patronus messenger) in another section of this thread. In short, I don't think was know enough about who Partronus Messengers act to make a judgement here. Date:Tue Jan 17, 2006 2:07 pm Subject:Re: Patronus issues http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/146614 > 10. Is there any significance to the fact that Trelawney is at > the start of term feast? > bboyminn: I think it is a case of Trelawny feeling like she better make her presence more felt at Hogwarts, otherwise 'that nag' will probably take over her job completely. So, it just Trelawny hedging her bets by keeping a higher profile. > 11. Toward the end of this chapter, we have two different > situations ... First ... with nearly Headless Nick, was this > meant to be comic relief, or showing Ron's insensitivity? Later, > as Harry tells Ron the story of what happened on the train, he > believes Ron shows his friendship by not laughing. Does this > show anything about Ron's character, or is this just normal for > any kid his age? > bboyminn: Ron has never been very sensitive to anyone. Later in the story, he makes insenstive remarks about Myrtle being dead too. So to some extent, this is just Ron being Ron and Ron being a teenage boy. In the context of the storyteller though, I think it is meant to show contrast. For things Ron considers insignificant, like Nick being dead, he is a typical teenage boy. But when it comes to Harry getting attacked, he takes it very seriously. Though Harry does have some reason to be concerned, especially after Ron's insensitivety to Nick. It is not that uncommon for teen boys to take great delight in the injury and pain of their friends. Micheal Kelso (Aston Kritcher) of "That 70's Show" said bluntly and with great humor that 'It's funny when friends get hurt'. And, I'm sure many people did laugh at Harry getting himself into such a foolish situation and getting himself hurt, although, it is clear that he is not seriously hurt which makes is a little more OK to be funny. > 12. Throughout the book, Harry asks about Dumbledore's hand, > and he is repeatedly told that he'll learn what happened later. > He never does. Will the exact details of what happened to the > hand be important later, either in what Harry has to do or in > understanding what happened on the tower? > bboyminn: Once again we have a case of Dumbledore not giving important information because he doesn't feel the person has an immediate need to know, and once again, it is to everyone's great detriment. We did find out how Dumbledore injured his hand, he was breaking the curse on and releasing the soul bit from the Ring Horcrux. That's nice to know, but it doesn't help Harry. Harry will have to break curse and he will have to release the soul bit from their Horcruses, and it would have been very valuable information for him to know the details of what Dumbledore did and how the injury occured. Harry will certainly face similar injuries himself, and it would have helped greatly if Dumbledore had made him aware of some of the pitfalls. By withholding details, Dumbledore has left Harry completely unprepared to tackle the remaining Horcruxes. I can accept that Dumbledore was busy and away from the castle frequently, but if he really valued Harry and accepted the task Harry had ahead of him, he would have taken a few seconds to talk to him, and would have set someone else the task of bringing Harry up to speed on curse breaking and Horcrux destroying. I'm not sure if Dumbledore's genius is so high that he assumes everyone knows what he knows, or at least can find out. Could it be that he operates on such a high level that he can comprehend the needs and level of function of other people. Or, is it simply a case of Dumbledore keeping information to himself. He only tells people what he thinks they need to know in the moment with no thought for what they may need to know in the future. Either way, it irritates me to know end that the people supporting Harry have left him so ill-prepared for the task ahead. > 13. Here is one of my favorite parts in the book, for surprise > value, Dumbledore announcing Slughorn as Potions teacher. How > did you react when you read Dumbledore's announcement of Slughorn > as potions master? > bboyminn: I've been predicting a new potions teacher for many many months, so it came as no surprise to me. I was firmly convinced that the time had come for Snape to take over DADA, and for a new teacher to allow Harry into NEWT potions. So, I guess I got one right, though we will ignore all those brain waves I got wrong. > 14. I have racked my brains and can't remember any place in > the books where it is stated as fact that Dumbledore did not > trust Snape and that is why he has never given him the DADA > post before. ... bboyminn: Let us not forget that there are many levels of trust. To general have a strong trust in Snape, it quite different than trusting Snape with the DADA job. The DADA job was not a matter of Snape's loyalty to Dumbledore, it was a matter of both the job's curse and Snape's fondness for the Dark Arts. Given those two, it would be unwise to let Snape have the job. But in the last book, several circumstance conspired to make this the year. Snape made an Unbreakable Vow, that backed him into a corner. He was doomed no matter what, so he might as well have the job. Second, after so many year of the cursed DADA job, I don't think there was a single soul left who was willing to take the job, so that left Snape. Combine the two, and as I said, the time was ripe. > > 15. How do you feel about Harry's savage comment that at least > it means Snape will be gone by the end of the year? .. > bboyminn: Just a case of Harry's normal frustration with Snape. I don't think he meant the 'death' part literally. We, people in general, frequently make extreme comments like this as a way of releaving tension. That all I see happening, Harry releaving some of his tension and frustration surrounding Snape. I didn't put to much stock in it. > 16. Do you think Dumbledore's specific mentioning of not wandering > after bedtime is aimed at the trio in particular? > bboyminn: Oh, yes indeed. Though I must point out that because of Harry's POV, we don't know that much about what other students and other Houses do. I can't believe that they are all saint who never get up to any mischief. But we certainly know that Harry has a tendency to wander about at night, so I do think there was special emphasis in Dumbledore's statement directed at the Trio. > 17. When Harry tells Ron about the things he overheard Draco > saying on the train, we see more doubt on the part of Harry's > circle about his suspicions of Draco. Why doesn't Ron believe > that Draco is up to anything? bboyminn: Ron certainly believes that Draco is up to something, but he is having trouble accepting that it is Death Eater business. I think to most, and reasonable so, it seems incomprehensible that a pampered cowardly schoolyard bully like Draco would actually be a Death Eater and involved in a Death Eater plot. They do believe Harry, they just aren't willing to believe at the extreme that Harry is willing to go. As others have addressed, I think the Trio being excluded from the Order contributes to their sense that Draco could never be a Death Eater. The one thing they forget, unlike the Order where people care what happens to it's member, the Death Eaters are cold and ruthless; any means to achieve their end, even if it mean using schoolboys. Also, I think indirectly, Draco approached Voldemort with the idea of getting into the castle undetected, and I'm sure Draco would have gladly done THAT PART. But Voldemort is never content to allow people to operate within their comfort zones. He must assert absolute control and authority over them. So Voldemort tacks on the additonal task of killing Dumbledore, couching it as a great honor and service to the Dark Lord. Draco may be dumb, but not so dumb as to think he can refuse or bargain with the Dark Lord. Now he is stuck. Now he must face what being a Death Eater really means. It means the loss of free will. It means being at the total control of the Dark Lord, bowing to his every illogical and irrational whim. Not as grand and glorious a life as I speculate Draco had dreamed. Just a few thoughts. STeve/bboyminn From katmac at katmac.cncdsl.com Thu Jan 19 01:41:14 2006 From: katmac at katmac.cncdsl.com (lagattalucianese) Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2006 01:41:14 -0000 Subject: The GoF Train Scene (was:Re: Humanity, Kant, Caricatures, and Draco) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146687 > > a_svirn: > I suspect they saw nothing from the stands. Surely Dumbledore would > have stepped in at this point? If this seems an odd sort of > entertainment, look at the second task. They certainly saw nothing > of the proceeding. Just sat there at the lake and gaped at its > smooth surface. I really wonder what Bagman found to comment upon. > La Gatta Lucianese: Actually, all three of the tasks struck me as somewhat poorly thought out from a spectator point of view. The first task was both trite (dragons *again*? Ho-hum) and very quickly over, and the other two, as you point out, were mostly invisible. Why not just send the champions on a quest for something, and judge their success by what they bring back? Or else rethink the tasks to be more interesting to the audience. From hamstermap at yahoo.com Thu Jan 19 00:28:08 2006 From: hamstermap at yahoo.com (hamstermap) Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2006 00:28:08 -0000 Subject: Locket in Black house Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146688 I remember in my time of reading the fifth book that they found a gold locket and not realizing what it was did something with it. Now assuming that Regulus Black really is R.A.B. could this locket be the Slytherin locket. I know he is dead but on the note in HBP the writer said that he would be long dead before anyone found the fake locket. I also remember Regulus Black wanting to back out of the DEs. So I came up with this little bit and its just something to think about. hamstermap From duckyslilangel_2 at yahoo.com Thu Jan 19 00:01:55 2006 From: duckyslilangel_2 at yahoo.com (Amber) Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2006 00:01:55 -0000 Subject: Spell Lights In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146689 Goofbal wrote: > > I was re-reading OOP when I had a thought. In using stupefy and > Reducto and other such hexes, curses, etc, you see a certain color. A > red beam or a avada kedavra green and such. Why is it that when using > these type of spells you see the light but in Charms (eg wingardium > leviosa) and Transfiguration you dont see a light, it just happens. Amber IMO the lights only show up when there is extreme emotion behind them. For example, you wouldn't necessarily be angry or frightened during a charms lesson, but you would be if you were in danger. Once again, this is just my opinion...I could be wrong. Amber From bartl at sprynet.com Thu Jan 19 02:05:51 2006 From: bartl at sprynet.com (Bart Lidofsky) Date: Wed, 18 Jan 2006 21:05:51 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: The Evil of Voldemort; Lily's choice In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <43CEF3FF.1050904@sprynet.com> No: HPFGUIDX 146690 La Gatta Lucianese: > Or perhaps to leave her alive and use her guilt over Harry's death > (and James' death too, in that he would have died for nothing) to > manipulate her into giving him something he wanted (information, the > prophecy orb, who knows). Granted he could have put an Imperius Curse > to control her, but speaking as the sometime victim of a master > manipulator and guilt-tripper, I think he would have found using her > guilt and her misery to make her do his will much more satisfying. Bart: Or, taking it further, since it seems that powerful wizards can resist the Imperius Curse, the guilt would probably leave her more vulnerable to it, by making resistance a return to pain rather than normalcy. One would assume from the evidence we have seen that the less resistance the victim puts up to the Imperius Curse, the harder it is to tell that they are under it. Bart From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Thu Jan 19 03:58:12 2006 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2006 03:58:12 -0000 Subject: Spell Lights In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146691 Goofbal wrote: > > > > I was re-reading OOP when I had a thought. In using stupefy and Reducto and other such hexes, curses, etc, you see a certain color. A red beam or a avada kedavra green and such. Why is it that when using these type of spells you see the light but in Charms (eg wingardium leviosa) and Transfiguration you dont see a light, it just happens. > Amber responded: > IMO the lights only show up when there is extreme emotion behind them. For example, you wouldn't necessarily be angry or frightened during a charms lesson, but you would be if you were in danger. Once again, this is just my opinion...I could be wrong. > Carol notes: I think the intensity of the emotion may affect the amount of light, but I also think that the light itself is a distinctive part of curses, including the milder forms, hexes and jinxes, and possibly of defensive spells (DADA) used to counter them, such as Protego and Impedimenta. These spells are essentially weapons, a force ejected from the wand that causes a specific action against an opponent, whether its bouncing his own spell back on him or causing him to spit slugs. Charms, in contrast, merely cause an object to do something it wouldn't normally do (hover, glow, come when it's called, hide from those who don't know the secret); Transfiguration alters the properties of an object or living thing so that it becomes something else, at least to all appearances. So the light from the wand is simply a feature of a certain type of spell used either for fighting or self-defense. (Interestingly, although the Reductor curse is used for solid objects, it's still referred to as a curse and may well be a defense or weapon against enemies. Could that vbe what Peter Pettigrew used to blow up the street and kill all those Muggles?) Also, although we associate certain colors with certain curses (including those that are considered DADA rather than Dark, or defensive rather than offensive)--for example, red with "stupefy" and green with Avada Kedavra, the color range appears to be quite limited. I recall one curse with a purple light (the one Dolohov used against Hermione), and I think I recall some other curse described as having a jet of violet light (violet and purple being, apparently, not quite the same color). "Reducto" and "stupefy" are both red; Avada Kedavra and Ron's "Eat slugs!" are both green. Also the Death Eaters at the QWC in GoF are sending off jets of green light but not killing anybody, and quite possibly, not all the jets of green light that break the statues in the MoM confrontation between Voldie and DD are Avada Kedavras. Sorry to go off on a side note here. My (speculative) answer to your question is in the first paragraph. The second paragraph is additional thoughts relating to the topic of light and curses. Why we never see an orange or yellow or blue jet of light coming from a wand, I don't know. We seem to have a battle of red and green among curses, just as we do on the Quidditch field--or in the eyes of the hero and the chief villain, where red is equated with evil and green with good, reversing the associations we seem to see elsewhere. Carol, noting that Snape's incantation to heal Draco doesn't fit the countercurse pattern at all and is perhaps sui generis From coriolan at worldnet.att.net Thu Jan 19 04:09:32 2006 From: coriolan at worldnet.att.net (Caius Marcius) Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2006 04:09:32 -0000 Subject: FILK: Christmas Slugs Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146692 Just a few weeks late...... Christmas Slugs (HBP, Chap. 15) To the tune of Christmas Bells from the stage version of Rent NOTE: I'm adding a CHORUS OF DWARVES (we'll just say that they're the same Dwarves Lockhart hired in Year Two) as part of the entertainment. The original song quotes a number of traditional Christmas Carols, so I'm having the Dwarves sing from The Very Harry Christmas page, singing filks by Melody & Pip, Eric Oppen and CMC THE SCENE: Slughorn's Office, as his mega-Xmas bash gets underway. CHORUS OF GUESTS Christmas party's starting Christmas party's starting Christmas party's starting In Slughorn's - office AN ELDERLY WARLOCK Golden hangings, golden hangings Golden hangings, golden hangings Golden hangings, golden hangings ALL What a night of festive cheer! It's the A-list party of the year! (Enter HARRY and LUNA Here comes Harry She's with Harry And Harry's bringing her as a precautionary (The CHORUS gazes in wonder at SLUGHORN'S lavish decorations) What hangings! What mandolins! What fairies! What pipe smoke! What red lights And lamps And . SOLO DWARF "Rufus the lion-visaged" CHORUS OF DWARVES "Rufus the lion-visaged" ALL A room for our Sluggy Clubbings, right here And Snape's beginning to sneer SLUGHORN Eldred, I said ELDRED WORPLE Stay with me, Sanguini! LUNA (pointing to SLUGHORN) Tassled hat ELDRED WORPLE (taking HARRY by the arm) Let us chat SLUGHORN (to House-elf) Bring us five martinis (A fleet of house-elves, each bearing a heavy tray of savory food and drink, pours into the room) CHORUS OF HOUSE-ELVES Trays we're bearing Clothes not wearing ALL A room for our Sluggy Clubbings, right here And Snape's beginning to sneer ELDRED WORPLE (to HARRY) What about a book? Just look at this - We're craving to know all about you If you're agreed, Right away if we're speedy We'll write of your rites Between Right and Wrong HARRY (turning away) I don't want to do that MCLAGGEN (crudely pawing HERMIONE) I'm so great at Quidditch TRELAWNEY (to herself, swigging down her sherry) I do not deserve such treatment HERMIONE (overlap with below, as she pulls away from MCLAGGEN) 'Mac ? `Mac You are worse Than Grawp Give me some way to slow The ways you've touched me so MCLAGGEN (overlap with above, as he continues to grope) Hey?I've got great hands So say my fans Oh-Oh-Oh-Oh HERMIONE Look there ? Snape's beginning to sneer! (McLAGGEN turns to look at the sneering SNAPE, enabling HERMIONE to remove herself from his presence) TRELAWNEY (to HARRY) I've said, "You're the One who's Chosen" But still you're dropping out How I've wanted to Put Dobbin out of sight! HARRY Right! TRELAWNEY/LUNA But you/we dropped out! SLUGHORN (suddenly interrupting) But it's always the way Ev'ry teacher would say What we've taught we all thought That it ought to give the foremost delight TRELAWNEY (to a passing house-elf) Wait, wait, wait bring one glass of mead HARRY (to LUNA) Let's us feed ? I'll get a plate There's much food left so we need not speed (SNAPE suddenly enters HARRY's field of vision) Aack? it's him! SLUGHORN Sev'rus! SNAPE Potter? HARRY Yikes! LUNA (to HARRY) Have no fear HARRY/SNAPE Hey ? Snape's/I'm beginning to sneer CHORUS OF DWARVES "I'm dreaming of a Black Christmas" SLUGHORN (throwing his arm around HARRY) Just like his mum, just like his mum With his potions, he makes `em hum Just like his mum, just like his mum Look at him, Snapey! SNAPE But he's dumb! SANGUINI (to a group of giggling girls) Got any Type A? ELDRED (trying to pull him away) Be cool SANGUINI Got any Type 0? ELDRED (trying to pull him away) You fool! SANGUINI Got any B? Double A? Double O? ELDRED (removing him from the group) Just take a pasty, guy! Let us go! (HERMIONE finds herself before HARRY & LUNA) HERMIONE Hey HARRY & LUNA Hey HERMIONE (irritated) Oh, that guy I'm with! I should've taken Smith HARRY Forget that! HERMIONE I blew it! I just did it due to Ron HARRY Why? (A house-elf wanders by with several heavy platters) HOUSE-ELF Dinner platter? SLUGHORN Give me two HARRY Don't talk to Ron of tryouts HERMIONE Is Quidditch all you think about? SLUGHORN (to SNAPE) You couldn't say he's mediocre SLUGHORN/SNAPE He's going to be/He thinks he'll be a great Auror LUNA Those Aurors Are horrors My father ripped their cover off With Dark Arts, gum disease Tear apart Ministries ? we should know HARRY & HERMIONE And Snape's beginning to sneer McLAGGEN This is luck, don't you know Herm `neath mistletoe LUNA Old Rotfang And his gang Their evil cut-rate Cunning (Meanwhile, the WEIRD SISTERS have joined forces with the DWARVES, and prepare to harmonize together) THE WEIRD SISTERS (to the CHORUS OF DWARVES) Give us a C note. Give us a D note. Give us a B note. What a technique! Let's do some tracks! ELDERLY WARLOCK Golden hangings (Enter ARGUS FILCH & DRACO MALFOY, the former dragging in the latter by the ear) FILCH (to SLUGHORN) Sir, this is Malfoy DRACO (wrenching free) Hi FILCH He was sneaking in here HARRY (aside) Ha, my old arch-rival! FILCH Let's make him bounce LUNA, HERMIONE & TRELAWNEY Break fake snake SLUGHORN Let him in! FILCH & DRACO Without invite SLUGHORN I've Grandpa met HARRY Filch is a bitter one FILCH It's no fun HARRY (gazing at DRACO) He looks half-dead SLUGHORN (aside) I'll still Malfoys shun! DRACO (aside) There's no relief! ELDRED (pulling HARRY aside) Let us still talk together In interviews upcoming. HARRY Don't even bother I'll not give one! (The following passages are sung simultaneously, climaxing in a glorious cacophony of counterpoint) CHORUS OF STUDENT AND FACULTY GUESTS Sluggy's Club is swinging Sluggy's Club is ringing Sluggy's Club is singing What a scene! ? Such cheer! Luna Lovegood lets you see Each irate conspiracy She's our Luna Looney Luna She is longing to expose the Big Kahuna No Snorkacks No Heliopath No Blibbering Humdinger No Nargles, no moonfrogs Just loose nuts Quibbling over who conspires Loose nuts Quibbling over who conspires A room for our Sluggy Clubbings, right here CHORUS OF DWARVES & THE WEIRD SISTERS I'm dreaming of a Black Christmas A family I've never known Twinkle spells! Wrinkled elf! Fa la la la fa la la la It was the night Voldy became Silent night Halloween night Fall on your knees it's Voldy time He'll do more crime SANGUINI (flirting with a group of girls as ELDRED is otherwise occupied): Got any type A? Got any type O? Got any type B? Even Brand X? Gack! Vampire on fire! Gotta lose my thirstiness! AB for me I'm like LeStat! I'm like LeStat! I'm like LeStat! Hemoglobin hemoglobin Don't let it clot! Don't let it clot! Any vein any B any hemoglobin joy Any vein any B any hemoglobin joy Got any Type A, got any Type O Got any vein any B- any hemoglobin? (ELDRED WORPLE & HARRY continue their "negotiations" over the former's proposed literary project, specifically the number of interviews to be conducted) ELDRED Four or five HARRY Zero ELDRED Four or five HARRY Zero ELDRED Let's say Three or four HARRY Zero ELDRED Three or four HARRY Zero ELDRED Well, OK Two or three HARRY Zero ELDRED Two or three HARRY Zero That's it! ELDRED One or two HARRY Zero ELDRED Only one HARRY Zero ELDRED But the gold .! HARRY Zero ELDRED Zero Shit! (WORPLE walks away in disgust, removing SANGUINI from the gaggle of girls) CHORUS OF DWARVES & THE WEIRD SISTERS We Sound Su- -Per hot when we're performing MCLAGGEN Where's Hermy? HARRY Don't ask HERMIONE (aside, hiding under HARRY'S Invisibility Cloak) He was all over me DRACO (aside) I'll ace my plans yet SNAPE (aside, gazing at DRACO) He needs a warning (SNAPE regards DRACO with anger and ? is it possible? ? a bit of fear; HARRY notices the suspicious interaction between them) SNAPE/HARRY (each, aside) That/Those One/Two Holds/Hold Some secret close I should learn it I should learn it I should learn it I should learn it I should learn it I ALL And Snape's beginning to And Snape's beginning to And Snape's beginning to .. (Seated at the keyboard, one of THE WEIRD SISTERS picks out the chords of the beloved holiday classic "The Twelve Magic Uses") SNAPE (spoken): I'd like a word with you, Draco ALL ..Sneer! (Exit SNAPE with DRACO in tow, closely followed by HARRY under his cloak) - CMC HARRY POTTER FILKS http://home.att.net/~coriolan/hpfilks.htm From ConstanceVigilance at gmail.com Thu Jan 19 04:17:00 2006 From: ConstanceVigilance at gmail.com (Constance Vigilance) Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2006 04:17:00 -0000 Subject: Dumbledore's Final Escape In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146693 --- kelleyaynn wrote: > Kelleyaynn: > > Peeves is a poltergeist, not a ghost. We don't even know if he was > ever a living person (poltergeists do not need to be). So I don't know > if Peeve's could ever cross over. > CV: Peeves is a very interesting character. Can someone who never lived ever die? What would happen if Peeves went through the veil? My pet theory is that Peeves can travel freely between worlds because he has never lived and that will become an important issue in the Final Book. CV From AllieS426 at aol.com Thu Jan 19 04:27:51 2006 From: AllieS426 at aol.com (allies426) Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2006 04:27:51 -0000 Subject: CHAPDISC: HBP8, Snape Victorious In-Reply-To: <002a01c61ab8$b41be730$0400a8c0@pensive> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146694 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Sherry Gomes" wrote: > > 4. Some have said that we didn't see enough of Harry grieving for Sirius. > What do you think of this scene, with Harry's thoughts about Tonks and his > inability to talk to her about Sirius? Does this show his grief to you? Allie: He had a little time to heal over the summer. The pain is obviously worst when it's freshest, even by the time Harry sees Dumbledore he has healed enough to be embarrassed by his behavior in DD's office at the end of the last term. He's still grieving but in a less obvious way when we see him in this scene. > 8. Ok, I've been dying to ask this question for months. It's come up once > or twice before with no response. Did Snape see that Harry's face was > covered in blood? He did have a lantern with him, and when they entered the > school there was a lot of light. If he did see it, why didn't he comment or > why didn't he realize that Harry had not been late on purpose, that > something must have happened to Harry on the way? If you believe he didn't > see it, why not, how could he not see it? With all the extra security and > all that going on in the wizarding world, why didn't he ask Harry how his > face got bloodied? Were his snarky comments to Harry on the walk up to the > castle just the usual routine, done to keep up appearances, or does he still > seriously hate him so much? Hmm, I never thought about that. When I first read it, I did not realize Harry was covered in blood until one of the kids mentioned it. When I re-read it, I think I assumed that he DID see Harry's face covered in blood but was just being typical Snape and giving Harry grief anyway. I can't imagine that Snape TRULY thought Harry was trying to make a grand entrance! That's so unlike anything that Harry would do! (Maybe it's just me projecting because *I* know that Harry would never do that.) > > 9. Hermione tells Harry that Hagrid was only a few minutes late, yet Snape > had said that Tonks' message to Hagrid couldn't reach him, because Hagrid > was late, and that was why, he, Snape, had taken the message instead. Was > this true? Do you think Snape intercepted the patronus message before it > could reach its intended recipient? How long do Patronuses take to arrive > with a message? Did it arrive when Hagrid was not there? Did Snape > intercept the message because he was supposed to protect Harry, or just to > have another golden opportunity to give him a bad time? I did find that highly suspicious and hoped for an explanation. If Snape did in fact intercept the Patronus to look after Harry, was he asked to do it or did he take it upon himself? > 10. Is there any significance to the fact that Trelawney is at the start of > term feast? Is this only the second time we've seen her at the feast? > We'll hear more about Trelawney, I bet. > 11. Toward the end of this chapter, we have two different situations with > Ron, both that jumped out at me in different ways. First in the > conversation with nearly Headless Nick, was this meant to be comic relief, > or showing Ron's insensitivity? Later, as Harry tells Ron the story of what > happened on the train, he believes Ron shows his friendship by not laughing. > Does this show anything about Ron's character, or is this just normal for > any kid his age? > Actually, I was appalled that Harry even thought Ron *could* laugh at him in this situation. It's funny when your friend trips on their own two feet and falls on their butt. It's NOT funny in the slightest when your friend gets THEIR FACE STOMPED ON by a mutual enemy! I would have been horrified if Ron laughed. He's too good to have done that. > 13. Here is one of my favorite parts in the book, for surprise value, > Dumbledore announcing Slughorn as Potions teacher. How did you react when > you read Dumbledore's announcement of Slughorn as potions master? Were you > shocked? Did you expect it at all? When Harry and Dumbledore were going to > meet Slughorn, did you think it was to hire him for DADA? > I knew it was coming. I was suspicious when I saw a chapter titled "Snape Victorious." Then after the Slughorn chapter I realized that neither DD nor Slughorn actually mentioned "Defense Against the Dark Arts." So I knew. > 14. I have racked my brains and can't remember any place in the books where > it is stated as fact that Dumbledore did not trust Snape and that is why he > has never given him the DADA post before. Is this a case of rumor and > gossip becoming fact over time? Why indeed did Dumbledore give or not give > Snape the job? Has Snape really wanted it all these years? Did you think > about the DADA curse when you heard that Snape had the position? I still can't figure Snape out! No idea if he really wants the position, but Umbridge noticed that he applied for it several times. Did he really want it, or was he applying for some as-yet undisclosed Dumbeldore/Snape "we must keep up appearances" reason? > 15. How do you feel about Harry's savage comment that at least it means > Snape will be gone by the end of the year? Did Harry's comment about > keeping his fingers crossed for another death disturb you? I found it insightful ("at least he'll be gone by the end of the year"). And it didn't disturb me because I don't think Harry really meant it. As I have mentioned before, there's a difference between hating someone and wanting them dead (in that instance referring to Snape hating James, coincidentally). Lots of people say, "I'm going to kill him if...." and don't mean it! > > 16. Do you think Dumbledore's specific mentioning of not wandering after > bedtime is aimed at the trio in particular? Absolutely!! Great job, Sherry!!! Allie From quick_silver71 at yahoo.ca Thu Jan 19 04:34:54 2006 From: quick_silver71 at yahoo.ca (quick_silver71) Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2006 04:34:54 -0000 Subject: The Training of Harry Was Re: CHAPDISC: HBP8, Snape Victorious In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146695 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Steve" wrote: >Steve: Once again we have a case of Dumbledore not giving important > information because he doesn't feel the person has an immediate need > to know, and once again, it is to everyone's great detriment. > > We did find out how Dumbledore injured his hand, he was breaking the > curse on and releasing the soul bit from the Ring Horcrux. That's nice > to know, but it doesn't help Harry. Harry will have to break curse and > he will have to release the soul bit from their Horcruses, and it > would have been very valuable information for him to know the details > of what Dumbledore did and how the injury occured. Harry will > certainly face similar injuries himself, and it would have helped > greatly if Dumbledore had made him aware of some of the pitfalls. > > By withholding details, Dumbledore has left Harry completely > unprepared to tackle the remaining Horcruxes. I can accept that > Dumbledore was busy and away from the castle frequently, but if he > really valued Harry and accepted the task Harry had ahead of him, he > would have taken a few seconds to talk to him, and would have set > someone else the task of bringing Harry up to speed on curse breaking > and Horcrux destroying. > > I'm not sure if Dumbledore's genius is so high that he assumes > everyone knows what he knows, or at least can find out. Could it be > that he operates on such a high level that he can comprehend the needs > and level of function of other people. Or, is it simply a case of > Dumbledore keeping information to himself. He only tells people what > he thinks they need to know in the moment with no thought for what > they may need to know in the future. > > Either way, it irritates me to know end that the people supporting > Harry have left him so ill-prepared for the task ahead. Maybe Dumbledore didn't feel that formal training in either curse breaking or Horcrux destroying was what Harry needed though. Or maybe those things would actually be an impendent to Harry succeeding in his mission. JK herself has said that Dumbledore was mainly self-taught so it could be that he takes the view that one must discover their own ways of dealing with things. From the three Horcruxs that we have seen so far I'd tend to agree with Dumbledore. The dairy was basically unprotected from destruction, the ring was concealed with enchantments and carried a powerful curse, and the locket was guarded by the potion and an army of the undead along with being in an out of the way location (along with a concealed entrance and boat ride). So it could be that Dumbledore didn't want to put Harry in intensive training for skills that he might never need. I also would like to think that Voldemort has been a good job of protecting the Horcruxs from people as "common" as a curse breaker. Surely Voldemort has heard of the concept of curse breaking and added a little trick or two to his curses. The fact that the DADA curse is still in place after all of these years speaks to Voldemort's skills. Also people like Bill Weasley (a name often thrown around as helping Harry) are often described as breaking Egyptian curses not exactly up to date. Rather I think that Harry should have been paying close attention to Dumbledore's investigative skills his cunning at getting information, the way that he connected dots and followed through leads, and his knowledge of how Voldemort works. And I do think that Dumbledore showed Harry those things in HBP hence the pensieve trips to watch Dumbledore in action, the task involving Slughorn, and the fact that Harry is connected to Voldemort's mind and has been within it. Take as an example how Harry got the memory from Slughorn the basis of that idea, to get Slughorn drunk, was in Harry's head the day that Ron was poisoned. So Harry has the right idea he just needed the Felix potion to jingle the circumstances a little. Quick_Silver From ConstanceVigilance at gmail.com Thu Jan 19 05:04:15 2006 From: ConstanceVigilance at gmail.com (Constance Vigilance) Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2006 05:04:15 -0000 Subject: Snape ignoring HP blood (was: CHAPDISC: HBP8) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146696 > Pippin: > > I'm wondering about that supposedly blocked secret > passage behind the mirror, now. Peter knows about it (so does > Lupin) and as we saw in CoS, blocked passages can be opened. > > CV: I've wondered about that myself. It's been mentioned at least twice now (once by the twins, once by Sirius). That seems awfully important to just be window dressing. Of course cough*MarkEvans*cough maybe it's nothing at all. But I'm betting that this will show up again. CV, who is still expecting Quirrell to make a return appearance in the final book. From Nanagose at aol.com Thu Jan 19 05:06:39 2006 From: Nanagose at aol.com (spotsgal) Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2006 05:06:39 -0000 Subject: Spies, Lies and Self fullfilling prophecies In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146697 > > > Pippin: > > > > > > The plot to frame Sirius was underway before > > > Godric's Hollow, from what Fudge and McGonagall say, so it's > > > almost certain that Voldemort, not Peter, was behind it. > > Pat: > > I don't disbelieve you, but could you provide canon for this? > Pippin: > The conversation at the Three Broomsticks, PoA ch 10, shows that > Sirius was already under suspicion. McGonagall says Dumbledore > remained worried after he learned that Sirius would be the Secret > Keeper. Fudge says that Sirius seems to have planned a declaration > of support for You-Know-Who for "the moment of the Potters' death." Christina: I think this is something of a stretch. *Somebody* was under suspicion - McGonagall says that Dumbledore "was sure that somebody close to the Potters had bee keeping You-Know-Who informed of their movements." His uneasiness about Sirius being the Potters' Secret Keeper was because Dumbledore didn't want to take any chances - obviously, one of James's friends was betraying him, and Dumbledore offered himself up as the Secret Keeper as a safety measure. If Dumbledore had seriously suspected Sirius in particular, I doubt he would ever have let James use him as the Secret Keeper, no matter what. Fudge's words are coming from the fact that Dumbledore knew there was a spy, Sirius Black came out to be the lead suspect for the passing of information that lead to the deaths of the Potters - he put two and two together. > Pippin: > Fudge was Junior Minister in the Department of Magical Catastrophes > at the time and closely involved in the investigation -- he's not > just quoting wild stories from the Daily Prophet here. Christina: The "investigation" of Sirius Black began when he killed the Potters. Fudge never says that there was evidence from prior to GH against Sirius, and he never says that the Ministry (or anybody) had suspected him specifically prior to that Halloween. Also, take into consideration Fudge's version of an "investigation" - Dumbledore says that there was a spy in the Order, he gives testimony that Sirius was the Secret Keeper, and eyewitnesses support Sirius's guilt. Not such bad evidence, but I highly doubt thought was put into finding evidence for Sirius's supposed spying activities before GH. It's emphasized in the book that Fudge rushed to convict Sirius without a fair trial; for somebody so eager to jump to conclusions, filling in the details isn't very much of a stretch. Again, if there had been any evidence (no matter how manufactured) that pointed to Sirius being the spy prior to the Potters' death, I can't see Dumbledore sitting on it. It's just somebody drawing a very obvious (and admittedly logical) conclusion. There has been a spy all along. Here was have caught ourselves a spy. The same guy has been a spy all along. > Pippin: > Dumbledore says the Ministry can detect a killing curse "The > Ministry, on the other hand, knew at once that this was a wizard's > murder." -- HBP ch 17. So the Daily Prophet was probably correct in > saying that only one curse was responsible for the deaths. Christina: Are we sure that they mean an actual killing curse? I always thought it seemed logical enough to assume that the act of blowing up the street (so intense that it caused a crater that exposed the sewer lines) would have easily killed everyone in the immediate vicinity. Otherwise, why blow up the street at all? Furthermore, if Peter did want to blow up the street, why go out of his way to kill Muggles with an AK - surely the explosion would kill enough of them to serve his purpose. Stan says that the curse "blasted 'alf the street apart." Why expend the energy to do both acts when either one would suffice alone? So, I don't think it was any great feat of magic - I think it was just a simple spell that was capable of exploding things, set on high. I would actually be hard-pressed to believe that any Muggles would survive a blast like that to begin with. > Pippin: > If Peter *did* perform the unheard of magical feat of killing > twelve people with a single curse while holding his wand behind his > back, he must have been thoroughly coached on how to do it. He > doesn't seem capable of having come up with such original spell > work on his own. Christina: All that would show is that Voldemort had been teaching Peter some "tricks," which is highly likely, given the fact that Peter accuses Sirius of the same. > Pippin previously: > > Yet if Godric's Hollow had gone as Voldemort had planned, framing > > Sirius would have been pointless from the point of view of > > protecting his spy --if the spy was really Pettigrew. Christina: Now I'm a bit confused. Maybe you've addressed this before, but who do you think *did* blow up the street and kill the Muggles? Sirius says that it was Peter, and he was obviously paying pretty close attention. As far as I know, you're not advocating ESE!Sirius, so I'm at a bit of a loss. Also, let's say that the Muggle-killing was a hefty piece of magic after all. Let's say that Voldemort even taught Peter said piece of magic. That doesn't necessarily mean that Voldemort taught Peter the magic with the intent of framing Sirius. You're right, there is *no* reason for Voldemort to want Sirius framed. Peter proves useful in getting to Harry Potter, and so his work is basically done. He's finished as a spy either way, essentially. There are only so many people that are "close to the Potters" who could have been a spy, and so Peter (or whoever you choose as your preferred spy) would have been found out easily. Losing a spy is a pain, but it is a small price to pay for eliminating the kid prophecied to defeat you. However, when the incident at Godric's Hollow doesn't go quite as planned, well - then Peter is in trouble. Maybe Sirius's ravings of a Secret-Keeper switch will be taken seriously, maybe they won't (nobody else was told of the switch, and Sirius has family history against him). It's also interesting to note that, while Peter certainly doesn't make himself too scarce, he isn't the one that goes looking for Sirius. Sirius goes looking for him. If Voldemort had had some kind of grand plan to frame Sirius, there's no way Peter would have left Sirius to his own devices. Sirius could have very well gone straight from GH to Dumbledore for help. > Pippin: > On the other hand, if Peter also was framed, then the plan might > have been for the real spy to eliminate him at the moment when > he confronted Sirius, leaving said personage free to continue > spying on the Order. Eventually Sirius's conviction would come > into question, as above, but the Order would be on a wild goose > chase for the supposed Rat animagus spy. Christina: I don't see how this would be any different than the alternate scenario. No matter who does the spying, if it continued after GH, Dumbledore would be suspicious again. With two of James's childhood friends dead and only one left - the one that gave incriminating information on Peter, no less - Dumbledore would have drawn the obvious conclusions. Christina, who *will* be replying to your other post, asap From darkmatter30 at yahoo.com Thu Jan 19 06:38:48 2006 From: darkmatter30 at yahoo.com (Richard) Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2006 06:38:48 -0000 Subject: Mrs. Figg (Was: Dursleys) In-Reply-To: <004d01c61b96$d747f760$0201a8c0@betty9wiwuzem4> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146698 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "SilverStag" wrote: > I don't buy muggle! or squib! Aberforth, but obviously can't > disprove it. Richard here: Both the muggle!Aberforth and squib!Aberforth theories are disproven in canon by Dumbledores story about Aberforth in OotP, wherein he says his brother was not bothered by the stories written about him following his trial for performing inappropriate charms on goats. Neither muggle!Aberforth nor muggle!Aberforth would be able to have performed a charm on a goat, inappropriate or not. Richard, who still wonders what constitutes, in this instance, an "inappropriate" charm on a goat ... Perhaps JKR has read "Bored of the Rings" ... From darkmatter30 at yahoo.com Thu Jan 19 07:18:22 2006 From: darkmatter30 at yahoo.com (Richard) Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2006 07:18:22 -0000 Subject: Book 1 Questions In-Reply-To: <43CD8430.000014.01084@D33LDD51> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146699 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Donna" wrote: > 1. On the list of supplies needed for first years is the > note, "PARENTS ARE REMINDED THAT FIRST YEARS ARE NOT ALLOWED > THEIR OWN BROOMSTICKS". (Chap. 5, Pg. 67). Harry receives > his Nimbus 2000 broomstick from Prof. McG (Chap. 10, Pg. 164) > because of "special circumstances" (Pg. 165). Does special > flying abilities warrant the school breaking its own rules? > Wouldn't a school broomstick been adequate? Richard here: I think the issue of first-years and brooms is along the lines of protecting the first-years from themselves. If you recall the first flying lesson, and the HBP Quidditch tryouts, first-years are portrayed as pretty much incapable of controlled flight without being taught and having considerable supervised practice. The exceptions shown are Draco and Harry. Even Hermione is shown as having some difficulty getting a broomstick from the ground to her hand. In the case of a first-year of exceptional flying ability sufficient to being placed on the Quidditch team, a school broom would work, but certainly would not be competitive, and a school may certainly have more in the rule than was stated in the letter, such as an additional clause stating, "... unless such is require for a member of a house quidditch team." Letters are more likely to state the general rule than the fine print. Schools may also change their rules, or amend them slightly, if circumstance prove them either inappropriate or not sufficiently flexible to handle the variable circumstances that arise. There is also a purely legalistic argument that the broom belonged to professor McG, not Harry, as there was nothing in the packaging that we were told of stating that this was Harry's broom. > 2. The Malfoy's are suppose to be "upper crust" in the WW and, > according to Draco,"...mother's up the street looking at wands," > (Ch. 5, Pg 77). Mr. Ollivander states, The wand chooses the > wizard." (Ch. 5, Pg 85). Is Mrs. Malfoy buying Draco's wand while > he's being fitted for robes? Would a wand that did not choose the > wizard be good enough for the Malfoy's son, considering their > standing in the WW? Richard again: I always saw it as either of two things: Narcissa making sure that Olivander's had wands in stock suitable to someone of the Malfoy's standing, or Narcissa shopping for another wand to go with some new robes she may have purchased. After all, there is nothing in the books that indicates that there can be only one wand for each wizard, and the Malfoy's strike me as folk who would want even their wands to be coordinated with their clothes and jewelry. > 3. How did Hagrid get the key to Harry's safe in Gringott's (Ch. 5, Pg. > 73)? Richard yet again: One of Hagrid's titles is "Keeper of the Keys," so having a key seems appropriate from that perspective, but also, we have the fact that Dumbledore was effectually Harry's guardian in the Wizarding World, following the death of his parents and Sirius' arrest and imprisonment, so it makes sense that Dumbledore would have had access to a minor's vault, and even the key ... which he could hand to Hagrid as "Keeper of the Keys." > 4. What was the green smoke that came out of Harry's safe when > the door was opened? Richard still another time: A narrative special effect, perhaps? As we are not told anything explicit about the smoke we are free to speculate. I presume it was there as much to keep things a little strange for Harry as anything, but the base-line presumption would certainly have to be that it was in some way tied to the magical protections of the vault. > 5. Why wasn't the dark wizards that broke into Gringott's vault > (Ch. 8, Pg 141) sucked through the door and trapped in the vault > (Ch. 5, Pg.76)? How would the dark wizards know the counter-curse > to prevent being sucked through the door? Did the dark wizards > have a goblin accomplice? Richard ... again ... (aren't you getting tired of me yet?): That seems to be part of what is supposed to make this so alarming to the Wizarding World. "Who would have the nerve to do such a thing?" "Who would have the skill and knowledge to do such a thing?" From Nanagose at aol.com Thu Jan 19 07:32:46 2006 From: Nanagose at aol.com (spotsgal) Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2006 07:32:46 -0000 Subject: /ESE!lupin questions (long) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146700 If I had known that I'd get to this tonight, I would have combined this with the other post. Mods, forgive me. I snipped as much as I could (look upthread for full text). >>Christina: >> >>Harry misinterprets what he sees loads of times, but I've found that >>his errors tend to be of the interpretive sort, not the factual sort. >Pippin: >Um, there's the time he thought he'd heard Slughorn was going to >teach DADA. And the time he said he hadn't thought of Voldemort >before he thought of the dementors in Lupin's class. > Christina: Your examples are ones where Harry witnesses something but doesn???t understand the meaning of it ??" he *assumes* that Slughorn will teach DADA but it???s never stated in the textual part of the book, it doesn???t occur to him that he???s already chosen a compartment but we know that he does because he says so in the text. My point is, while the books are not in the first person, they are intended to be from Harry???s point of view. With very few exceptions, we see what Harry sees. And Harry???s eyes have never failed us when we talk about what is given *in text*. I???ll give you that Harry might be wrong about the second jet of light, but the first one most definitely comes from Bellatrix???s wand. And if he sees that, then he should have also seen the origins of the second jet. I???d also argue that there???s a huge difference between noticing something as mundane as the fact that he???s already chosen a compartment, and noticing that the spell that murders his godfather (while he is blatantly staring at the scene) is not from Bella???s wand. He cares a whole lot more about the second issue. >Pippin: >Before starting their tale about the 'weapon' Lupin and Sirius >exchange a fleeting glance, which suggests that they know something >the others don't. Christina: Yes, but you are generalizing the ???other??? into most of the rest of the Order, which isn???t necessarily true. The fleeting glance could have very well been between Lupin and Mr. Weasley. And it???s Mrs. Weasley that puts a stop to the flow of information, which implies that she too knows that there is more information to be told. >Pippin: > If the Order knew that Voldemort was trying to steal a prophecy > about Harry, then any of them could have warned him, despite > Dumbledore's wishes. Christina: But why? How often to the members of the Order blatantly disregard the instructions of their leader? If Sirius knew about the prophecy, as you suggest, even *he* kept his mouth shut, obeying Dumbledore's orders. >Pippin: >If Peter could be bullied into betraying his friends, why is it >far-fetched to think he was bullied into confessing? Christina: Well, I guess we disagree on Peter???s motivations for joining the Death Eaters. I don???t think he was bullied into it at all ??" Peter???s a guy who likes ???big friends??? that can protect him. The Order is hugely outnumbered in VWI and is losing. What???s a self-preserving rat to do? >Pippin: >And if he does want revenge on Pettigrew, what sort of revenge would >he want on the Ministry of Magic, who are forcing his kind into >stealing and killing to live? Christina: Many characters have grievances with the Ministry. Also, Lupin has had a better lot in life than most werewolves. He certainly hasn???t (to our knowledge) been forced to steal or kill to live. He was allowed to go to Hogwarts as a child and receive an education (complete with books and robes and such). He was even able to live at Hogwarts for a year, complete with room, board, and a teacher???s salary. He must have had a place to live after that because Sirius is able to ???lie low??? with him. He has social skills, which suggests that he didn???t spend his entire life living in a box and eating out of dumpsters. Dumbledore has done more for Lupin than anybody else has, and taking revenge on the MoM by joining the Death Eaters is taking revenge on Dumbledore, too. I find it more likely that Lupin would ally himself with the man who showed him kindness and fairness, as opposed to a group of snotty pureblooded Slytherins. >Pippin: >I don't think I see your point. What matters, in my scenario, is not >how the Trio came to realize that werewolves should not be outcasts, >but whether the Trio's faith that werewolves are not more >untrustworthy than humans could survive a betrayal by the werewolf >they trusted most. IMO, ESE!Lupin hasn't done anything that an >uncontaminated human with the same character faults wouldn't have >done in his shoes. The fight against prejudice should not depend on >whether one werewolf is good or bad... It would be unrealistic to >show all that bitterness and enmity going away overnight even if >Lupin was another Gandhi. Christina: I don???t think that it is realistic for that to happen either, but it is Lupin himself that is a powerful force in changing the minds of the Weasley family, whose opinions of werewolves changes only after contact with Lupin. His influence to open people???s minds seems pretty broad by the reaction of the students in OotP to Umbridge???s complaints about Lupin. Dean Thomas angrily says that Lupin was the best DADA teacher they ever had. >Pippin: >The fight against prejudice should not depend on whether one werewolf >is good or bad. Christina: The fight against prejudice shouldn???t depend on the loyalties of one werewolf, but when we know that the loyalties of *all* werewolves belong to Voldemort, that is something else entirely. My point, and the thing that causes me the most unease, isn???t that Lupin being evil is bad because he happens to be a werewolf. It???s that people believe the worst of him *because* of his lycanthropy. Many of your own reasons for believing in ESE!Lupin touch on issues surrounding his lycanthropy, and that is my central problem. Earlier, I used a lot of other examples in the series to show how JKR gives us examples of goodness in varying minorities, but Lupin is more than this. JKR has come out and said that lycanthropy is a metaphor for ???people???s reactions to illness and disability.??? JKR is careful in the way she speaks about her books, but she???s never lied to us. It seems odd for her to wax poetic on the hardships that Lupin has had to face as a disabled person, only to have him pop out of the woodwork as a bad guy who just can???t help but be evil. >Pippin: >I want to see Hermione persist in her efforts to help the WW's >outcasts gain their freedom, but I don't see that JKR has to make it >easy for her or that there needs to be any more than a better hope of >progress at the end of the book. Christina: I don???t see how keeping Lupin on the good side does either of those things. Fighting prejudice will never be easy. >Pippin >She has told us that there was a reason Sirius had to die, and I >assume this means that there was both a plot reason and a thematic >reason. Christina: Why? I can think of many reasons why Sirius might have had to die, having to do with both plot and theme ??" from the dreaded ???Harry must go it alone,??? to the fact that Dumbledore is the one that needs to be close to Harry in Book 6, to the fact that Harry might have been compelled to show Sirius the RAB note (in which case, Sirius might have recognized his brother???s handwriting). We still don???t know what is going on with those mirrors. And as I said before, there is still a lot we need to find out about James and Lily. JKR can limit Lupin???s access to Harry in HBP by carting him off to spy on the werewolves, but Sirius doesn???t have that sort of freedom. To get rid of the possibility of Sirius telling Harry more than he can know at this point, JKR might have had to kill him off. >Pippin: >We can't even argue anymore that justice wouldn't have been served if >he'd turned Peter in, since the head of the Wizengamot at the time >was, it turns out, that unreliable Ministry bureaucrat Albus >Dumbledore. Christina: Could Dumbledore have really done anything? Who heads the Wizengamot is irrelevant because the entire court votes on cases (at least those of high importance, which this would be). Might justice have prevailed? Sure. But the argument is definitely still there that it might not have. > Pippin: >...Lupin must have become estranged from his old friends. But what >would he do then, this man who wants so much for people to like him? >Where else would he turn? .... It was a dangerous time to go looking >for new friends, or so Hagrid told us in PS/SS. Christina: How about the rest of the Order? Lupin seems to be friendly enough with members of the Order when he goes to pick up Harry in OotP. He???s told them in advance how much Harry looks like James, which is pretty irrelevant from a business standpoint. If we???re taking the order in which Moody says the names on the photograph, Lupin was standing near Emmeline Vance and Benjy Fenwick. Maybe he was friendly with them, or at least as friendly as anybody can be while constantly living in terror and whisking off to complete secret missions. The members of the Order in OotP and HBP seem unusually chummy, even the new members that don't have a background of being reliable or trustworthy. > Pippin: >There's more evidence of estrangement than the photograph. James >must have thought Sirius's suspicion of Lupin was credible, or he >would have wanted Lupin told about the switch. More than that, Sirius >never confronted Lupin with his suspicions until the Shrieking >Shack. Odd, if they were such close friends. Remember when Harry >thought Hagrid had opened the Chamber of Secrets? He didn't get a >chance to ask Hagrid about it, but he *was* going to. That shows up >"each suspected the other but didn't know how to broach the subject" >as the melodramatic contrivance it is. Sure they might hesitate for a >while, as Harry did, but for an entire year? Christina: It???s funny you should use this as evidence of further estrangement among the Marauders, because I see it as exactly the opposite. The spy in the Order had been giving Voldemort information on the whereabouts of the Potters, specifically. I doubt Dumbledore would see fit to announce at Order meetings the location of Lily and James (particularly once he realized there was a spy), which is why Dumbledore doesn???t just suspect any old Order member of being a spy, he suspects somebody *close to the Potters,* somebody close enough that would actually have the information concerning their location. Therefore, for Sirius to have suspected Lupin at all means that Lupin must have still enjoyed a close enough relationship with the rest of the Marauders to have been privy to the knowledge of the Potters??? whereabouts. Sirius is fiercely loyal and all evidence shows that he loves his friends very much. I don???t see him as they type to sit around pondering the ways in which his friends might betray him. His accusations to Peter adopt a tone that borders on incredulity. We know he suspected Lupin of being the spy, but not enough to ???out??? him to Dumbledore. The way I see it, the Potters, on the run with a small child, only kept a little group of people in the know about their location. When they kept being found, Sirius had *no choice* but to face the facts ??" one of his very closest friends was a spy. I don???t think that Sirius had a thought-out accusation of Lupin (like I said, he doesn???t bring his suspicions to Dumbledore). His thinking Lupin a spy seems to be more like a process of elimination ??" he knows *he* isn???t the spy himself, he vastly underestimates Peter, and the only person he has left is Lupin. I think you underestimate the atmosphere of the day ??" even the closest of friends were suspicious of each other. Also, just because Sirius was only left with Lupin as a candidate for being a spy, wouldn???t have proven to him that Lupin was truly evil. He could have been under Imperious, or locked in a trunk while a polyjuiced!Lupin floated around (my, where have we heard that one before?). As to the amount of time that goes by without Sirius confronting Lupin, the spy was handing over information on the Potters for a year, but that doesn???t mean that Sirius suspected Lupin for that entire year. Also, I would say that Lupin and Harry have a decently close relationship (they certainly trust one another), but they barely interact in HBP, a book that takes place in an atmosphere very similar to the one existing back in VWI. We don???t know exactly what Lupin and Sirius were doing for the Order back then, but they may not have been able to see or have contact with each other very much. One more thing - in talking about the "each suspected the other" issue, are you referring to Lupin and Sirius? I don't think it's made clear in the text that Lupin ever suspected Sirius of being the spy (until he was put in prison). When Lupin asks Sirius to forgive him for thinking he was the spy, he is probably talking about letting Sirius rot in Azkaban for all of those years. If Lupin had believed Sirius to be the spy, I can't believe he would have just sat by and let Sirius become the Potters' Secret Keeper. > Pippin: > The murder of Cedric is ambiguous. Harry thinks Voldemort did it. > JKR said that "Wormtail" killed Cedric...I don't think we can be too > sure she meant Peter. Especially since, as loyal DDM!Snape > supporters, we must believe that JKR is highly, er, selective, about > what she tells us. Christina: One of my biggest problems with ESE!Lupin is right here ??" it complicates a ton of events that have very simple explanations. JKR said that Book Six was a ???time for answers.??? Now I don???t know about you, but I still think there are tons more questions to be answered in Book 7, and I have no idea how she is going to fit them all in. Now is the time for simple, elegant theories that explain a lot of different mysteries all in one go. It isn???t the time to create new mysteries out of things that had previously been cut-and-dry. >Pippin: >Er, how does a dreadful sneak feign friendship for an entire year >without a qualm? Christina: Peter might have barely interacted with his friends, like I said above. And as for feigning friendship ??" look at Tonks! She acts REALLY WEIRD throughout the entirety of HBP, and people just seem to accept the explanation that a once-confident Auror (who had to have gone through some psychological testing before being able to join) actually lost magical power because of love. Heh, maybe Peter had a girlfriend back then and could hide any nervousness or weirdness in that (not to mention super-secret dates with Voldemort). Christina From Wink45zes at aol.com Wed Jan 18 22:17:33 2006 From: Wink45zes at aol.com (Wink45zes at aol.com) Date: Wed, 18 Jan 2006 17:17:33 EST Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Patronus issues (was ChapDisc: HBP8, Snape Victorious) Message-ID: <14.54342a02.3100187d@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 146701 bboyminn: First, I think we frequently become confunded more by what we don't know than by what we do know. For example, we don't know that a Patronus has to stay visible for the whole time that it exists. We also don't know that it must travel in realtime by 'real' methods. Wink: True enough, but what I am feeling confunded by is trying to make what little we do know about the Patronus Charm from book three work with this new action that a Patronus can perform. In a world of magic where anything is possible I am very uncomfortable about setting any real limits on anything. But even magic has its own set of rules. "Accio!" does not transfigure an object, regardless of intention or imagination. We can imagine lots of "maybe this, and maybe that" but are they connected with what we see in canon? bboyminn: Well before we get bogged down in security problems let's acknowledge security advantages. First, a Patronus has no solid form and therefore can not be harmed. Since it can not be harmed, it can not be compelled to give up it's message. It also can not be stopped by protective enchantments or solid barriers. Next, it is inherently an anti-dark arts spell, so it can't be affected by dark magic. Also, since Patronuses tend to be unique to the wizard, it is very hard to fake a message or send a false message. Wink: Ah, here we run up against a pet peeve of mine. Rowling does indeed say that a patronus is "anit-Dark" magic on her web site, but it is never said to be so in the books. I'm an old-fashioned gal, and firmly believe the books should provide adequate and correct information. Extra communications from the author such as Letters, side booklets for charitable purposes, or official web sites are fine for clarifying various points, or even adding new peripheral information, but I really object when it is used to change what is in the books themselves. Lupin told Harry that the patronus is "anti-Dementor" which is quite different. Dementors, like House-elves, or Merpeople, are inherently magical creatures with their own kinds of magic. As horrid as they are I see nothing that makes them necessarily "dark." True, I don't want to spend much time near them, but I don't want to spend any time near an alligator either. And I'm not sure we know the limitations of Dark Magic. Is it inconceivable that Voldemort could not cast a 'trapping spell' to cage a patronus? As the Patronus Charm is very powerful magic, it is most likely that only a very powerful dark wizard could interfere with one. But in a magical world when anything is possible I will not accept any assumptions of limitations. (humm, still wondering what Snape thinks is the best way to deal with dementors if it is not with the Patronus Charm?) A Patronus can of course be used against other forms of attack then just a dementor. Harry used one against the boggart in the maze, and while fairly ineffective it did cause the boggart-dementor to trip, giving Harry the clue he needed to know what he was really up against. Harry's Patronus also effectively took care of the Malfoy / Crabb./ Goyle / Flint fake 'dementor' at the Quidditch match. While a nasty bunch of gits, and all from Dark families, I'm not sure a bunch of gits pretending to be a dementor qualifies as "dark magic." bboyminn: We don't know the extent of the Patronus Messenger. Maybe they do travel in realtime and are therefore only good for short distance messages. If they do not travel in realtime then logic would assume that distance is not significant barrier to them. They could near instantly deliver a message halfway around the world. Wink: I have a really hard time wrapping myself around the idea of a Patronus time-traveling. And I don't think we need to go to that extreme. We know that there is magic that can send objects instantly across great distances, as when Dumbledore sent Harry's trunk from Privet Drive to the Burrow. Or perhaps the Patronus simply darts at almost the speed of Apparition, which would make it invisible to a human eye. Either way, there are possibilities without having to resort to the complications of time travel. bboyminn: I suspect that in the instance of Tonks trying to contact Hagrid or Dumbledore summoning Hagrid to the location of the Barty Sr attack, there were not messages. The mere presents of a recognisable Patronus would have cause people to come and investigate. In the case of Dumbledore's Patronus summoning Hagrid, it could have merely flown off in the direction of the trouble, and Hagrid followed in that direction. As soon as Hagrid had the direction, the Patronus's mission was accomplished and it vanished. Wink: I daresay that simply pointing in a direction is inadequate for me. I sure don't have an accurate compass in my head, and I've yet to see any indication of that talent among wizards. Hagrid may know his way around the Forbidden Forest, but how many others are comfortable walking blindly 'in that direction'? And for how far? I think the most significant example of using this messenger-patronus is when Snape first confirms that Sirius was still at Grimmauld Place, and a bit later when he alerted "certain members" of the Order. In the first case, this was not an "I need you here now" message, but a "confirm where you are." The reply could certainly have been simple appearance of Sirius's patronus. A Patronus going from wizard to a place would require the wizard knowing exactly where the person he wants to send a message to really is located at that moment. And if, as it seems, that other members of the Order can 'take it' instead, there is open oopportunity for mischief. But if the Messenger-Patronus goes from person to person wherever they may be, even a reply-patronus would only confirm that Sirius had received Snape's query, without pinpointing his real location. A patronus arriving at Hogwarts and pointing toward Grimauld place, well it could also have been pointing at the Ministry of Magic. An arrow pointing might suffice over very short distances, but over great distance such as between Hogwarts and anywhere in London, it just is not accurate enough to serve the requirements of the story. There has to be something that can communicate a complex message. This, I think, is confirmed in the second Snape use of the messenger-patronus: "Dumbledore heaved a great sigh and then said, "Alastor Moody, Nymphadora Tonks, Kingsley Shacklebolt, and Remus Lupin were at headquarters when he made contact. All agreed to go to your aid at once. Professor Snape requested that Sirius remain behind, as he needed somebody to remain at headquarters to tell me what had happened, for I was due there at any moment. In the meantime he, Professor Snape, intended to search the forest for you. [OoP chapter 37] I note that it says "made contact," and not "arrived there," which to me means Snape did not run down to Hogsmeade and Apparate to Grimauld Place. He sent a complex message; one that contained the information (at least) that Harry (and others) were missing from the school; that Harry believed that Padfoot was "held where its hidden" and a request that someone go look for them there; as well as requesting that Sirius remain behind to brief the expected Dumbledore. There seems to have been an exchange of these messages, as the Order members sent their agreement to go, and Snape told them he was going to search the forest. This is all much, much more than a simple "come here." It could be with a spoken voice, but I don't think that is necessary. We have already seen how the "secret" of a hidden house can be revealed with the handwritten word. It is because of this that I prefer to think that this messenger-patronus is something of a shape-shifter, so that it can look like a patronus or a silver dart, and changes to a silvery roll of parchment with the message in written form, which dissolved into mist once read. bboyminn: Part of what I'm trying to say is that give our noticable lack of information on the nature of the Patrous as a messenger, we really can't accurately speculate on how good or bad a messenger they are. Wink: Ah, my mistake I believe. I was not concerned with whether or not a Patronus was a good or bad messenger. I am trying to work out if the devise of a Patronus as messenger works in all its details, however we can find or imagine them or if it is poorly conceived. My problem is that the previously described actions/abilities of a Patronus just don't jive with this new use. > > Marianne: > > I wonder if there is some sort of additional spell on the OoP > Patronuses to protect these messages from being told to someone not > in the Order, sort of a magical encryption. ... > bboyminn: I guess it is a matter of prespective and assumption, if you assume the Patronus Messenger is flawed then of course you will react accordingly. If you assume that it is a worthy messenger, then even lacking the details you will assume there is a reasonable explanation. It's a case of determining in your own mind whether the glass is half full or half empty. Wink: It is not so much that I think the messenger-patronus is flawed, just perhaps simply misnamed, or ill defined. . But here Marianne's question about an additional spell got me thinking (dangerous . . . very dangerous!) Most of our information regarding Patronuses are from the third and fourth books. All we know about the Patronuses is derived from how they perform when conjured by the specific spell using the "Expecto Patronum" incantation. They walk /run /fly. They stay nearby because they come between you and the dementor, letting the dementor suck off its 'happiness' thus protecting the witch or wizard. They can be moved where the wizard wants them to go, even to protect someone else. Perhaps the real difficulty is that Rowling is using the same name for two different things. This messenger Patronus is something new that Dumbledore developed, and taught only to members of the Order of the Phoenix. It is based upon the Patronus Charm, but he has made something completely new of it. While the incantation "Expecto Patronum" will, for those who can even work this charm, produce the 'protective shield' Patronus, I suspect that it requires an entirely different incantation to produce the messenger-patronus, an incantation we have yet to hear clearly. This new Charm would not be limited to acting as the Patronus Charm does; but instead it has an entirely different set of abilities and limitations. This new Messemger-Patronus Charm would create something that looks like a person's regular Patronus but would have all kinds of different abilities. Instead of simply walking/running/flying, it could dart at the speed of apparition, or 'send' itself over great distances,. It wouldn't need the kind of direct control we see in the Little Whinning alleyway or the O.W.L.s exam, but each would be created with a built in specific mission and message. There might even be something of the Fidelous Charm in it so that only those taught this Charm by Dumbledore could use or receive it, even if others can see the Patronus form. Okay, this is starting to work for me! A "Partonus" is a form, its shape determined to reflect each persons spirit (or spirit guide, but I'm not going there). What it does and how it acts is determined by different Charms with different incantations. Which Charm is to be used is determined by the wizard according to what he needs the Patronus to do: protect or communicate. Not unlike how "Hoover Charms" and "Summoning Charms" both make objects move, but they work in totally different ways for different purposes. *nodding head* Yup, that works for me . . . at least until Rowling blows it all out of the water by having "Expecto Patronom" make a messenger-Patronus. Thanks all for your patience and help while I slogged my way through this problem to a workable solution. Wink [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From birgit_ph at hotmail.com Thu Jan 19 08:26:00 2006 From: birgit_ph at hotmail.com (Birgit) Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2006 08:26:00 -0000 Subject: Ministry Inaction? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146702 > Goddlefrood says: > > Perhaps what we should discuss is what more the Ministry could do > against a deranged bunch of fanatics whose skills are the equal or > possibly superior to those working for the Ministry. > Birgit says: Anything they could have done would have been vastly more effective early on, had they listened to Dumbledore re: Voldemort's reappearance. Now, his forces have increased dramatically, especially since he recruits among other groups - dementors, werewolves, giants. One thing I have wondered about is spell detection - the ministry discovers Harry's Patronus use within minutes, but seems unable to detect illegal magic done by Death Eaters - neither the Avada Kedavra, unauthorized Portkey use, or duels going on in graveyards seem to draw any Ministry attention at all. Are known wizard residences and their surrounding areas watched, and the rest of the country isn't? One of the main problems of the Ministry seems to be that they simply can't find the Dark wizards in time to act before or during an attack or meeting. They are left to mop up the aftermath. They need to come up with some sort of tracking charm, an all-Britain version of the Marauder's map that will pinpoint DE locations - the wizarding equivalent of the GPS system... :-) Even if they could find them, I would think the fact that they are not allowed to use Unforgiveables while the Death Eaters have no such compunctions puts them at a distinct disadvantage. From finwitch at yahoo.com Thu Jan 19 11:28:44 2006 From: finwitch at yahoo.com (finwitch) Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2006 11:28:44 -0000 Subject: Dumbledore's Trusting Nature In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146703 > "mandorino222": Dumbledore HAS to > believe the best of people because that's his ticket. Once he > starts to draw lines and cut people off, he undermines his own > philosophy and becomes weaker as a result. Finwitch: I agree -- I think that the only ways for a (born?) Legilimens not to use this skill on people are trust and avoidance of eye-contact. We have seen that Dumbledore 'X-rayed' Harry if he had reason to doubt (like when he asked about Harry's name in a goblet.) Dumbledore knows that the only way he can act normally with people is to trust them. Aberforth apparently isn't as trusting as he is... and he clearly avoids looking Harry& co. into eyes. Now, as I believe Snape only heard part of the infamous prophecy because Aberforth knocked him out, well... Finwitch From finwitch at yahoo.com Thu Jan 19 11:56:26 2006 From: finwitch at yahoo.com (finwitch) Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2006 11:56:26 -0000 Subject: Spell Lights In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146704 Goofball: > > I was re-reading ootp when I had a thought. In using stupefy and > Reducto and other such hexes, curses, etc, you see a certain color. A > red beam or a avada kadavra green and such. Why is it that when using > these type of spells you see the light but in Charms (eg wingardium > leviosa) and Transfiguration you dont see a light, it just happens. If > anyone has any in-sight it'd be greatly appreciated. Finwitch: I think that those spells *do* produce some sort of light (electro-magnetic radiation). However, all light is not visible to human eye. (and some like UV and X-rays do have effect though...) Makes me wonder -- could one use a mirror to reflect magic (like AK) back to the caster? Finwitch From elfundeb at gmail.com Thu Jan 19 13:19:02 2006 From: elfundeb at gmail.com (elfundeb) Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2006 08:19:02 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Spies, Lies and Self fullfilling prophecies In-Reply-To: References: <80f25c3a0601171844l1021dfffg3cdb75d074b12ff9@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <80f25c3a0601190519t6424ce7m4f399cae94f5385a@mail.gmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 146705 Pippin, regarding Lupin's and Sirius's plan to kill Peter in the Shrieking Shack: Lupin was about to betray everything his closest friends believed in, everything for which they had fought, suffered and died. It's a poor way to honor their sacrifice. We can't even argue anymore that justice wouldn't have been served if he'd turned Peter in, since the head of the Wizengamot at the time was, it turns out, that unreliable Ministry bureaucrat Albus Dumbledore. Debbie: But why does that make Lupin a traitor and Sirius not so? Sirius' obsession with killing Peter equally betrays what his closest friends believed in. In fact, Sirius *invited* Lupin to join him in killing Peter. Is it the Azkaban effect -- Sirius' desire to kill is excused because he is reckless and crazed with anger, while Lupin is too calm and reflective to be given credit for such feelings? I disagree. Lupin tried to stay calm in the Shrieking Shack, but there were moments when emotion got the better of him. > Debbie: > While I'll admit that it's odd that Lupin is not with the other Marauders in > the old Order photograph (though given the fact that the members rearrange > themselves so those at the back move to the front, I think it's possible > that Lupin was directly in front of the Potters, then moved behind). > Moreover, if there was any estrangement, I think it did not extend beyond > Lupin and Sirius (each thought the other was the spy). I don't see how he > would be susceptible to an invitation to spy on Dumbledore and James, to > whom he owes so much. (Sorry, Pippin, this last point is one I've made many > times before.) Pippin: There's more evidence of estrangement than the photograph. James must have thought Sirius's suspicion of Lupin was credible, or he would have wanted Lupin told about the switch. Debbie: But they didn't tell *anyone* about the switch. They didn't even tell Dumbledore, the leader of the Order. And this decision made sense independent of whether they suspected Lupin of being the spy. I don't think for a moment they would've told Peter except for the fact that as the Secret Keeper he needed to know. *Sirius* might have told Lupin if he had not so underestimated Peter that he suspected Lupin instead, but the fact that Dumbledore wasn't told strongly suggests that James and Lily wanted as few people to know as possible, to limit the likelihood that the identity of the secret keeper would be revealed to Voldemort. We also have no canon whatsoever on who James suspected of being the spy. James may well have been convinced by Sirius' assumption that Pettigrew was not qualified for spying -- Sirius says they only switched Secret Keepers because Sirius suggested it. As Fudge states in PoA, "Potter trusted Black beyond all his other friends" -- not that I think what Fudge says is 100% reliable, of course. Pippin: More than that, Sirius never confronted Lupin with his suspicions until the Shrieking Shack. Odd, if they were such close friends. Remember when Harry thought Hagrid had opened the Chamber of Secrets? He didn't get a chance to ask Hagrid about it, but he *was* going to. That shows up "each suspected the other but didn't know how to broach the subject" as the melodramatic contrivance it is. Sure they might hesitate for a while, as Harry did, but for an entire year? Debbie: I don't doubt that there may have been some cooling in their friendship after the Prank. I posted my reasons in a post now lost in the mists of time. But it appears that there was little or no evidence of who the spy was, or Dumbledore would not have believed so readily afterwards that Sirius was the traitor. It's a very different thing to accuse a friend based on a mere suspicion than it would have been for Harry to question Hagrid about the evidence Riddle had shown him. Pippin: Lupin's history with the order is such a blank that any scenario is possible. But I can certainly imagine that he was getting more and more involved with the werewolves, identifying with their struggle against the Ministry, seeing that the Ministry was at the point of collapse, that his friends were *so* close to achieving their freedom...and all that was propping the Ministry up was the Order. People on this list have opined more than once that wizarding society is so corrupt that it doesn't deserve to be saved from Voldemort. Why shouldn't Lupin feel the same way? Or, alternatively, Lupin was passing information to the werewolves to protect them from the Ministry, without realizing that Voldemort could use the information to identify Dumbledore's Ministry contacts. Then Voldemort's agents threatened him with exposure as a DE sympathizer and blackmailed him into becoming their spy. Lupin went along with it thinking he could clever his way out of it somehow without having to confess to Dumbledore what he'd done. Debbie: I find this inconsistent with what Lupin says in HBP about his mission to the werewolves. "'Oh, I've been underground,' said Lupin. 'Almost literally. That's why I haven't been able to write, Harry; sending letters to you would have been something of a giveaway.' . . . 'I've been living among my fellows, my equals,' said Lupin. 'Werewolves,' he added . . . 'Dumbledore wanted a spy . . . However, it has been difficult gaining their trust. I bear the unmistakable signs of having tried to live among wizards, you see.''" It doesn't appear that Lupin was assigned to spy on the werewolves until HBP, because in OOP he seemed to spend a lot of time at 12GP -- he wasn't underground at all. Now Lupin could be lying with impugnity when he says how difficult it's been to gain their trust (under your scenario this would be an outright lie -- surely they'd trust him if he'd been feeding them info for years), but that doesn't seem to be JKR's style. The beauty of Fake!Moody was that he always told the truth, yet everything had a double meaning. Or, Lupin never realized that information he was giving the werewolves was reaching Voldemort. He lied to himself about the possibility, told himself that Sirius was the spy, nobly resisted all efforts to recruit him -- until he thought he saw a chance to save Lily by giving Voldemort James. As Dumbledore says, many ideas, each more unlikely than the next...but it's equally unlikely that Lupin could be completely unmoved by the plight of his people, or that he couldn't get caught up once more in the cleverness of playing a game against Dumbledore, or OFH! fashion, against Dumbledore and Voldemort both, always telling himself when things went wrong that it wouldn't happen again. Lupin is distressed by the plight of werewolves, but from his own personal experience. He comments at the frosty Christmas that "[the werewolves] have shunned normal society and live on the margins, stealing -- and sometimes killing -- to eat." He is certainly disgusted by Greyback's strategies. "And this is the man Voldemort is using to marshal the werewolves. I cannot pretend that my particular brand of reasoned argument is making much headway against Greyback's insistence that we werewolves deserve blood." I certainly agree that you've got many ideas, and that each is more unlikely than the next (is that what you meant). I can't deny that such speculation is great fun, though. So maybe Lupin is disgusted that Voldemort is using Greyback to marshal the werewolves because Lupin thinks *he* could do a better job? Wait a minute. I'm supposed to be arguing *against* ESE!Lupin. Too bad, because the sinners are much more fun; Faith does impose certain restraints on one's speculation. ;-) Ok, back to the program. > Debbie: > Pettigrew's defining characteristic, I think, is not his supposed lack of > magical skill, but his laziness. Of course, laziness often masquerades as > ineptitude, so it should not be surprising that Pettigrew is regarded as > "talentless" and "not in their league." However, a lazy wizard like > Pettigrew is capable of quality work if someone stands at his elbow to make > sure he doesn't lose focus and screw up. Pippin: So who was doing that, in the year that Peter operated unsuspected as the spy? Are you saying that Voldemort had another agent in the Order? Debbie: No, I'm saying that Peter merely reported on what he overheard. He wasn't a spy in the sense of covertly infiltrating an organization. He was merely an informer, repeating things that he heard. There seems to be this idea that Peter's job as a spy would have been easy. I say balderdash! How easy do you think it would be to hide from *your* closest friends that you'd joined a terrorist outfit and were now a traitor? I think that would be hard even if your friends weren't counter- terrorist experts and suspicous that someone in the outfit was a fink. Debbie: I would agree with you but for the fact that canon (Sirius, to be specific) tells us that Peter was assumed to be beneath suspicion because of his supposed lack of brains and talent. But he wouldn't be the only character in HP with more talent than he's given credit for. Take Neville, for example. He's got plenty of talent; he just has had trouble controlling it. Yet too many people wrote him off as a near-Squib. I think Pettigrew was in reality more middle of the pack than near-Squib. He did manage to master the Animagus transfiguration. He got help from James and Sirius, but they were exceptional students. Compared to the animagus spell, blowing up the street can't have been too hard. I'm sure he didn't aim at all those muggles (the wand was behind his back, so he couldn't see what he was aiming at), and that his finger was severed *before* he yelled out in the street. Really, this wasn't so complicated as to be beyond the capabilities of a trained wizard. Faking his death was so successful he did it again. And as the group left the Shrieking Shack, Peter was very quick to take advantage of the opportunity presented by Lupin's werewolf transformation. In quick succession, he (i) dived for Lupin's wand, (ii) cast successive spells on Ron and Crookshanks, knocking them unconscious, and (iii) transformed and ran away. (And in my scenario, he bit Dog!Sirius to get away.) So I don't think blowing up the street required an accomplice at all. > Debbie: > This argument might have more weight if Wormtail was a code name given to > him by Voldemort. As it is, lots of people know who Wormtail is. Lupin > knows, of course. "Sirius is Padfoot. Peter is Wormtail." Lupin tells us > in PoA. And so does Voldemort, who is on the other side. And Snape, too, > who has a foot in both camps. Given the generality of use of Wormtail, for > Wormtail to be someone else would be more than misdirection; it would be a > lie. Since Lupin was certainly right about the other three nicknames, and > Wormtail is used by so many people to describe Pettigrew (and to his > face), I think we are meant to understand that there is no other. Pippin: This argument might have more weight if the Marauder's Map, which *never lies*, had felt obligated to let us know that there were two Barty Crouches. Or if Harry hadn't once pretended his name was "Neville Longbottom" and again that his nickname was "Ronil Wazlib". Debbie: The Marauder's Map did not lie. Father and son are both named Bartemius Crouch and they are called by no other names (except the nickname Barty, which is used for both of them). "Sr." and "Jr." are fandom conventions used to distinguish them. As for Harry, no reader was ever misled into believing that Harry was either Neville or Roonil Wazlib. > Carol: > I think he feigned friendship for a whole year without a qualm, all the > while passing information on Order members (starting, maybe, with > those he cared least about but working steadily toward the Potters. >> > Debbie: > Peter is a dreadful sneak, As for Dumbledore, I > imagine that Pettigrew would have steered clear of him generally, and since > Dumbledore is the type to let others think things out for themselves, would > not have forced his presence on him. Pippin: Er, how does a dreadful sneak feign friendship for an entire year without a qualm? Exactly how does a member of the Order of the Phoenix steer clear of Dumbledore? Peter would have been at Order meetings, where, presumably, the leakage of information was discussed. And I don't think Dumbledore follows the Harry Potter method of investigation: ie, decide on a suspect first, then link all the evidence you find to him. I think he'd be a bit more conventional, you know, decide on a pool of suspects and gather evidence about all of them. Even if he eliminated Peter on the grounds you suggest, he'd still want evidence about other people close to the Potters, and Peter would be asked about it. Peter's nervousness would give him away. Debbie: We don't know whether this would have been addressed at meetings or not. Fudge (who is perhaps unreliable but was not lying through his teeth) said Dumbledore was sure someone was keeping Voldemort informed of the Potters' movements and suspected "that someone on our side had turned traitor and was passing a lot of information" to him. We don't know that Dumbledore would have interrogated people. And Peter seemed pretty nervous all the time. He was nervous in the exam. He acted nervous even when he applauded James' tricks with the snitch (note Sirius' comments about wetting his pants). In any event, are you saying Lupin was the spy *instead* of Pettigrew? If so, why did Peter admit to spying in the Shrieking Shack? Sirius accuses him of passing information to Voldemort for a year before Godric's Hollow and Pettigrew's response is merely that "He -- he was taking over everywhere! Wh -- what was there to be gained by refusing him?" An excuse, not a denial. He didn't even try to keep up his earlier assertion that he'd been forced to betray James and Lily. It seems to me that Peter's inability to keep a secret would be a problem under any scenario. Debbie who thinks it might be more fun to argue the other side but couldn't betray Lupin at this point by switching sides [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From maria8162001 at yahoo.com Thu Jan 19 11:22:56 2006 From: maria8162001 at yahoo.com (Maria Vaerewijck) Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2006 03:22:56 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Testrals, Patroni, and Animagi In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20060119112256.99268.qmail@web53208.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 146706 Chewie: And I believe that it has been specifically stated by JK that wizards have no control over what animal they transform into. This was in one of the newest interviews...I will check on the exact quote. I am almost positive it is in the interview with Jim Dale. There is something similar it seems with the patronus. It seems to me that Tonks did not have control over what shape her patronus took, and that the change was a result of what her heart was dwelling on. Harry's turns into a stag....he does not dwell on memories of his father at all...hmmmm...I think there is a connection between love/emmotion and patronus form as well. Could a wizard without love cast one? Could be an indicator of Snape's true colors. maria8162001: I also read somewhere, I'm not certain which of the 2 JKR's interview or HP Lexicon that patronuses are the guardians of the conjurers. That perhaps is the reason why they do not have control over what shape their patronus are. And I think that is the reason too why Harry's patronus is a stag, he longed for his parents and deep down I think he continues to believe that they are still watching over him. And yes perhaps it have somthing to do with a person's love/emotion. Maybe that is the reason we do not know Snape's patronus, if he has one at all. He was never mentioned conjuring his patronus. Maybe he doesn't have one. Maybe the dark wizards doesn't have guardians, that is why they do not have patronus? From maria8162001 at yahoo.com Thu Jan 19 11:38:02 2006 From: maria8162001 at yahoo.com (Maria Vaerewijck) Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2006 03:38:02 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: When will the ministry start kicking butt and taking names? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20060119113802.97811.qmail@web53212.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 146707 corey_over wrote: Maria, I don't think Dumbledore will be minister. Well obviously not, because he's dead. But I do agree with your quote that says "Dumbledore would do things differently." I think we can both agree on this. Scrimgeour would be a better minister than Umbridge! maria816200: Absolutely, Corey :) But I think there's still one we can both agree. That the MOM will not start kicking butt in the beginning of book 7, as they will only do that when the final battle is over when Voldemort is defeated? In short, more like what they did in VW1, (rounding up the DE when Voldemort was vanguish/gone) or after the battle in the MOM in the OOTP. They are good at that picking up the wasted/defenseless DEs. The MOM doesn't do the hard fight/work, what they do is, let the brave and the courageous do the hard and messy job and when it's over, MoM will just clean up the litters. From gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk Thu Jan 19 15:34:10 2006 From: gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk (Geoff Bannister) Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2006 15:34:10 -0000 Subject: Ministry Inaction? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146708 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Birgit" wrote: Birgit: > One thing I have wondered about is spell detection - the ministry > discovers Harry's Patronus use within minutes, but seems unable to > detect illegal magic done by Death Eaters - neither the Avada > Kedavra, unauthorized Portkey use, or duels going on in graveyards > seem to draw any Ministry attention at all. Are known wizard > residences and their surrounding areas watched, and the rest of the > country isn't? Geoff: Don't forget that Harry was "bounced" after the jelly incident in COS and after casting the Patronus in OOTP because he was accused on both occasions under the Decree for the Reasonable Restriction of Underage Sorcery. So checks seem to be made on minors but not on adults. Birgit: > Even if they could find them, I would think the fact that they are > not allowed to use Unforgiveables while the Death Eaters have no > such compunctions puts them at a distinct disadvantage. Geoff: That hasn't always been the case. Sirius told Harry: "Imagine that Voldemort's powerful now. You don't know who his supporters are, you don't know who's working for him and who isn't; you know he can control people so that they do terrible things without being able to stop themselves. You're scared for yourself and your family and your friends. Every week, news comes of more deaths, more disappearances, more torturing... the Ministry of Magic's in disarray, they don't know what to do, they're trying to keep everything hidden from the Muggles but, meanwhile, Muggles are dying too. Terror everywhere.. panic... confusion... that's how it used to be. Well, times like those bring out the best in some people and the worst in others. Crouch's principles might've been good in the beginning - I wouldn't know. He rose quickly through the Ministry and he started ordering very harsh measures against Voldemort's supporters. The Aurors were given new powers - powers to kill rather than capture, for instance. And I wasn't the only one who was handed straight to the Dementors without trial. Crouch fought violence with violence and authorised the use of the Unforgivable Curses against suspects...." (GOF "Padfoot Returns" p.457 UK edition) So, do we know whether these powers were rescinded? Or can Aurors still use Unforgivables? From amiabledorsai at yahoo.com Thu Jan 19 16:05:55 2006 From: amiabledorsai at yahoo.com (amiabledorsai) Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2006 16:05:55 -0000 Subject: The Evil of Voldemort; Lily's choice In-Reply-To: <43CE62C1.2050208@sprynet.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146709 Bart Lidofskye: > Which, of > course, brings up the question again; why did he give Lily the > choice of living? Given Voldemort as one who gains pleasure in > the suffering of others, the obvious theory was that his intent > was to get Lily to give up Harry to save her own life (which, it > appears, Voldy fully expected her to do), and THEN kill her anyway. > Of course, there may be an ulterior motive, to be revealed in Book 7. After Prisoner of Azkaban, I was convinced that Lily was to be Peter's reward for his treason. Lately, I've been wondering if she was to be Snape's. Amiable Dorsai From kchuplis at alltel.net Thu Jan 19 16:13:06 2006 From: kchuplis at alltel.net (Karen) Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2006 10:13:06 -0600 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Odds and Ends References: Message-ID: <005b01c61d13$3b3c4eb0$b301010a@ConsolidatedTelephone.local> No: HPFGUIDX 146710 Richard here: Schools may also change their rules, or amend them slightly, if circumstance prove them either inappropriate or not sufficiently flexible to handle the variable circumstances that arise. kchuplis: And you have to admit, when a parent can buy brooms for just ONE team at the school, not for the school in its entirety, the rules are not hard and fast. I sometimes think people also apply way too many "Americanisms" to Hogwarts. The house system may work completely different than what we are used to. Debbie: No, I'm saying that Peter merely reported on what he overheard. He wasn't a spy in the sense of covertly infiltrating an organization. He was merely an informer, repeating things that he heard. kchuplis: If there was ever a personification of "nark" I think Peter is it (bothways. I mean, is anyone indoubt it is OFH!Peter? No matter who eles is what?). That's maybe a polite term for him. We could also say rat, tipster, fink, snitch, squealer, stoolie....... (I think Pippin): There seems to be this idea that Peter's job as a spy would have been easy. I say balderdash! How easy do you think it would be to hide from *your* closest friends that you'd joined a terrorist outfit and were now a traitor? I think that would be hard even if your friends weren't counter- terrorist experts and suspicous that someone in the outfit was a fink. kchuplis Only problem is that Peter doesn't really have friends. Peter has protectors...of a sort. Even in the various glimpses we get at school, his "friends" aren't very friendly to him. And granted, he is annoying as all get out but still, he is not exactly buddies with any of the mauraders no matter if they "protect" him (out of whatever reason). He might be a tad more interested in friends, and a bit closer to it than LV, but one thing they have in common is "what's good for me is good for me." Peter just feels a little bad about it when he betrays people. Not bad enough not to do it, but he feels it a little bit anyway. Debbie: Compared to the animagus spell, blowing up the street can't have been too hard. I'm sure he didn't aim at all those muggles (the wand was behind his back, so he couldn't see what he was aiming at), and that his finger was severed *before* he yelled out in the street. Really, this wasn't so complicated as to be beyond the capabilities of a trained wizard. Faking his death was so successful he did it again. kchuplis: I think all he really needed to do was do a reducto at a gas line under the street and voila. YOu are absolutely right that we saw Peter do a LOT of complicated spells, in a short time or even simultaneously in PoA. He's no klutz with spellwork. (Reminds me a lot of the fake "P_P_Poor st-stuttutering P-PP-Professor Quirrell". People go on appearances of behaviour and those behavin' use it to fool people - sometimes subconsciously but often and certainly in these cases, consciously.) Pippin: Er, how does a dreadful sneak feign friendship for an entire year without a qualm? kchuplis: Everything we have seen of Peter's "friendships" fall squarely under the category of "pitiful sychophant". It's a pretty useful blanket cover. Now, *why* James,Lupin and Sirius let Peter hang out with them is a mystery to me, since they don't seem particularly fond of him at any point, but I guess we have all seen boy and girl groups like this, who, in general to make them feel magnanamous or always have someone lowest on the totem pole or whatever, keep this member around. IMO, Peter is not the "Neville" of the group. I think Harry and friends really are fond of Neville. Even Luna has become "endearing". I never got that impression from anything we have seen so far of Peter and the mauraders. maria816200 (on the MoM): In short, more like what they did in VW1, (rounding up the DE when Voldemort was vanguish/gone) or after the battle in the MOM in the OOTP. They are good at that picking up the wasted/defenseless DEs. The MOM doesn't do the hard fight/work, what they do is, let the brave and the courageous do the hard and messy job and when it's over, MoM will just clean up the litters. kchuplis: And take whatever credit they possibly can in the aftermath. From amiabledorsai at yahoo.com Thu Jan 19 16:33:58 2006 From: amiabledorsai at yahoo.com (amiabledorsai) Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2006 16:33:58 -0000 Subject: Ministry Inaction? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146711 > Birgit says: > One thing I have wondered about is spell detection - the ministry > discovers Harry's Patronus use within minutes, but seems unable to > detect illegal magic done by Death Eaters - neither the Avada > Kedavra, unauthorized Portkey use, or duels going on in graveyards > seem to draw any Ministry attention at all. Are known wizard > residences and their surrounding areas watched, and the rest of the > country isn't? Amiable Dorsai: >From Dumbledore's comments, I'd guess that the Ministry uses whatever resources it has for this sort of thing to monitor the homes and neighborhoods of muggleborn (or raised) minors. That would seem to be an easier job than monitoring all of Britain. Probably, they would be monitoring for not simply for violations of the Underage Magic laws, but also for bursts of accidental magic--they were right on top of things when Marge got herself inflated, for example. It would be a lot more important to watch for this sort of thing with muggleborns, since their parents would have no way to repair magical damage. It's also possible, given Fudge's comments at Harry's trial, that Harry has been watched (for his own protection) more carefully than other underage wizards. Petunia said that Lily used to do magic at home; if Lily got gigged for doing so, Petunia must have been unaware of it, else she would have known that Harry wasn't allowed. Amiable Dorsai From nkafkafi at yahoo.com Thu Jan 19 16:53:14 2006 From: nkafkafi at yahoo.com (nkafkafi) Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2006 16:53:14 -0000 Subject: Spies, Lies and Self fullfilling prophecies In-Reply-To: <80f25c3a0601190519t6424ce7m4f399cae94f5385a@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146712 > Pippin: > Er, how does a dreadful sneak feign friendship for an entire year without a > qualm? > > Exactly how does a member of the Order of the Phoenix steer clear of > Dumbledore? > > Peter would have been at Order meetings, where, presumably, the leakage > of information was discussed. And I don't think Dumbledore follows the > Harry Potter method of investigation: ie, decide on a suspect first, then > link all the evidence you find to him. I think he'd be a bit more > conventional, > you know, decide on a pool of suspects and gather evidence > about all of them. Even if he eliminated Peter on the grounds you suggest, > he'd still want evidence about other people close to the Potters, and Peter > would be asked about it. Peter's nervousness would give him away. > > Debbie: > We don't know whether this would have been addressed at meetings or not. > Fudge (who is perhaps unreliable but was not lying through his teeth) said > Dumbledore was sure someone was keeping Voldemort informed of the Potters' > movements and suspected "that someone on our side had turned traitor and was > passing a lot of information" to him. We don't know that Dumbledore would > have interrogated people. And Peter seemed pretty nervous all the time. He > was nervous in the exam. He acted nervous even when he applauded James' > tricks with the snitch (note Sirius' comments about wetting his pants). > Neri (finally finding a part of ESE!Lupin that he is able to follow): In addition to Debbie's sound points, are we supposed to think that Voldy now knows about Peter awing a Life Debt to Harry? Canon certainly doesn't support that. If Peter can hide his Debt from a superb legilimen like Voldy, it seems he isn't such a hopeless occlumen as Pippin makes him appear. So maybe he managed to keep secrets from Dumbledore too? And now that I'm thinking about it, ESE!Lupin does know about Peter owing a Life Debt to Harry. So does he too hide this from Voldy? Why? What is his motivation here? But whatever his motivation is, he seems to trust Peter's ability to keep the secret from Voldy. I mean, if Peter ever gets too nervous around the Dark Lord and spills the beans, Voldy is bound to summon ESE!Lupin and demand explanations. How come you neglected to mention this tiny detail, Mr. Mooney? Does my super agent have agendas of his own? Tsk, tsk. Bad, bad wolf. Crucio! Hmmm, you know Pippin, maybe it's time you and ESE!Lupin have a serious talk . He seems to disagree with you about Peter's ability to keep a secret. Neri From bartl at sprynet.com Thu Jan 19 17:01:19 2006 From: bartl at sprynet.com (Bart Lidofsky) Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2006 12:01:19 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Mrs. Figg (Was: Dursleys) In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <43CFC5DF.9050300@sprynet.com> No: HPFGUIDX 146713 Richard here: > Richard, who still wonders what constitutes, in this instance, > an "inappropriate" charm on a goat ... Perhaps JKR has read "Bored of > the Rings" ... Bart: More likely JKR is familiar with the late Marion Zimmer Bradley's character Lythande the Star-Browed (who very well may have influenced the HIGHLANDER series of movies, as well), who started off in the THIEVES WORLD series, then split off so that MZB could write stories about the character independent of the THIEVES WORLD series. In any case, in one of the stories, Lythande is in a town where the worst possible (and therefore most common) insult is to call somebody a "despoiler of young goats", which actually turns out to be key to the plotline. Ever since I read that story, whenever I want to give an example of a slanderous statement so ridiculous that nobody would believe it, I've used "despoiler of young goats". Bart From bartl at sprynet.com Thu Jan 19 17:33:29 2006 From: bartl at sprynet.com (Bart Lidofsky) Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2006 12:33:29 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: The Evil of Voldemort; Lily's choice In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <43CFCD69.9090104@sprynet.com> No: HPFGUIDX 146714 amiabledorsai wrote: >>Which, of >>course, brings up the question again; why did he give Lily the >>choice of living? Given Voldemort as one who gains pleasure in >>the suffering of others, the obvious theory was that his intent >>was to get Lily to give up Harry to save her own life (which, it >>appears, Voldy fully expected her to do), and THEN kill her anyway. >>Of course, there may be an ulterior motive, to be revealed in Book 7. > > After Prisoner of Azkaban, I was convinced that Lily was to be Peter's > reward for his treason. Lately, I've been wondering if she was to be > Snape's. Bart: There is the "Snape loves Lily" theory, which has a lot of proponents and opponents (I'm on the proponent side; it makes sense in reverse, in that it would explain a lot of things). Bart From tonks_op at yahoo.com Thu Jan 19 18:35:23 2006 From: tonks_op at yahoo.com (Tonks) Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2006 18:35:23 -0000 Subject: The Evil of Voldemort; Lily's choice In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146715 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Andrea Grevera" wrote: > > Maybe Voldy wanted to see if all mothers were the same. His mother, in his eyes, selfishly gave up her life and left Voldy to the orphanage. LV expected Lily be selfish too and to stand aside and save her life. Instead Lily did what Merope wouldn't or couldn't, she gave up her life so she could protect the life of her son and in doing so brought LV down with her. Tonks: I don't think that LV's mother "gave" her life. (JKR said that when Lily died for Harry, that no one had ever done that before.) LV's mother just died from the compactions of childbirth. At the time of Tom's birth women could still die in childbirth. She may have been weak from malnutrition and the stress of being homeless. Just because she was a witch doesn't mean that she could beat death. This is, of course, what her son tries to do. No doubt his mother's death had an impact on him. Probably a "what if" sort of thing. I am sure that it contributed to his twisted mentality somehow. But the point here is that Merope didn't "give" her life, she just died. As to why Lily didn't have to die. There have been many ideas here. One is that she worked in the Department of Mysteries and LV needed to get information from her. Someone once said that since she was a Mudblood she wasn't worth the bother. Also he may have wanted to torture her with the memory of her son and husband's death so that she would give LV the secrets in the Department of Mysteries that would help him. Maybe he thought that she would want to join up with him to figure out how to bring them back?? Maybe he was going to have her work in his potions lab with Snape. OR it isn't anything really big and when we find out we will all say.. "huh?? that is all there was to it?!" Tonks_op From annemehr at yahoo.com Thu Jan 19 18:50:55 2006 From: annemehr at yahoo.com (annemehr) Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2006 18:50:55 -0000 Subject: Sword is a horcrux In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146716 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "nuriaobradors" wrote: > > > > Hamstermap wrote: > > I don't remember but should go back through but others say that > > when he attempted for a Hogwarts job for a 2nd time that as he > > left he made a motion of his hand. What if before the "interview" > > he had killed someone and as he left he used the horcrux "spell" > > or whatever it was, only nonverbally I'm just assuming, and if he > > did he knows it's in a safe place because all of the headmasters > > would protect it. So, it would be a perfect place for it. Nuri: > What the book says: HBP: > "Oh, you want to come back to Hogwarts, but you do not want to teach > any more than you wanted to when you were eighteen. What is it you're > after, Tom? Why not try an open request for once?" > Voldemort sneered. "If you do not want to give me a job ?" > "Of course I don't," said Dumbledore. "And I don't think for a moment > you expected me to. Nevertheless, you came here, you asked, you must > have had a purpose." > > For a second, Harry was on the verge of shouting a pointless warning: > He was sure that Voldemort's hand had twitched toward his pocket and > his wand; but then the moment had passed, Voldemort had turned away, > the door was closing, and he was gone. > > "Why?" said Harry at once, looking up into Dumbledore's face. "Why did > he come back? Did you ever find out?" > "I have ideas," said Dumbledore, "but no more than that." > "What ideas, sir?" > "I shall tell you, Harry, when you have retrieved that memory from > Professor Slughorn," said Dumbledore. > ......................... > "I would be prepared to bet ? perhaps not my other hand ? but a > couple of fingers, that they be-came Horcruxes three and four. The > remaining two, assuming again that he created a total of six, are > more of a problem, but I will hazard a guess that, having secured > objects from Hufflepuff and Slytherin, he set out to track down > objects owned by Gryffindor or Ravenclaw. Four objects from the four > founders would, I am sure, have exerted a powerful pull over > Voldemort's imagination. I can-not answer for whether he ever managed > to find anything of Ravenclaw's. I am confident, however, that the > only known relic of Gryffindor remains safe." > Dumbledore pointed his blackened fingers to the wall behind him, where > a ruby-encrusted sword reposed within a glass case. [/HBP quotes] Nuri: > Considering the sword was used to fight a part of Riddle's soul > itself, sounds indeed very unlikely. Yet we don't know how being a > horcrux affects an object "normal" use. Depending on how this works, the sword could have been a > horcrux and still serve its purpose of aiding a true gryffindor in > peril. > > Now, considering LV fleeting visit to DD's office - what if it's the > other way round? Perhaps the object to become a horcrux is 'marked' > in advance by a spell, the when the murder is committed, a more > complete ritual is performed on the corpse that allows the soul-piece > to be transferred to the previously selected Horcrux. > > Ideas? > > Nuri > Annemehr: So we have LV's actions: a job request and a hand motion. We have DD's words: that LV would have liked to make a Hx of the Sword, that he's confident LV was not able to, and that LV didn't actually expect to be hired as a teacher. The wiggle-room in the idea of LV making a Gryffindor Hx is that DD calls the sword "the only known Gryffindor relic." It can't be ruled out that LV somehow managed to find another one that DD does not know about, however unlikely you may think it. Is this where Godric's Hollow comes in? The thing that sticks in my mind is that DD doesn't think for a moment that LV expected him to give him a teaching position -- therefore, whatever LV hoped to accomplish here, he must have counted on accomplishing it that day during his visit. And why show the memory to Harry if it's irrelevant, if LV was unsuccessful? But DD must have a reason to be confident the sword was untouched, and I imagine he does know how to make a Hx and whether LV had a real chance to do it during that visit. My guess is that DD is correct, and that sword is not a Hx, but also that Harry will need to remember that visit by LV for some other reason. Harry may even need to know that the sword is "clean" if he has another occasion to use it. My impression of LV's hand motion is that it reminded me of OoP, when Harry lost his wand in the dark and reflexively said "Lumos!" It lit up, only inches from his hand. Perhaps LV did a nonverbal spell and was able to channel it through his wand when his hand was near it. The spell itself, I thought, may have been the jinx he put on the DADA position. Annemehr From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Thu Jan 19 19:42:53 2006 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2006 19:42:53 -0000 Subject: When will the ministry start kicking butt and taking names? In-Reply-To: <20060119113802.97811.qmail@web53212.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146717 maria816200 wrote: > > But I think [t]hat the MOM will not start kicking butt in the beginning of book 7, as they will only do that when the final battle is over when Voldemort is defeated? In short, more like what they did in VW1, (rounding up the DE when Voldemort was vanguish/gone) or after the battle in the MOM in the OOTP. They are good at that picking up the wasted/defenseless DEs. The MOM doesn't do the hard fight/work, what they do is, let the brave and the courageous do the hard and messy job and when it's over, MoM will just clean up the litters. > Carol responds: OTOH, the MoM did have the real Moody on its side in VW1 and he didn't get those battlescars, including a lost eye and leg and a chunk gouged from his apparently sizeable nose by Evan Rosier by being ineffectual or cowardly. He hunted down Karkaroff, which took six weeks, and fought Wilkes and Rosier, young DEs in their twenties (both had been part of the Slytherin gang at Hogwarts) to the death because he could not bring them in alive. Other Aurors (possibly including Scrimgeour?) may have fallen into the trap of using the Unforgiveable Curses authorized by Barty Crouch, but Moody generally avoided them, bringing in Mulciber, Dolohov, and others whose names I can't remember offhand when these men had not yet been sent to Azkaban and weakened by the influence of the Dementors. That he did not also bring in Lucius Malfoy, Nott Sr., Avery, etc. is because they had gotten off by pleading Imperius--no fault of his own. Granted, Moody was a member of the original Order, but he was also a Ministry employee in VW1. So, apparently, was Scrimgeour. It remains to be seen what he will do against the DEs in Book 7. Also, Voldemort clearly regarded Amanda Bones as a real threat or he would not have personally murdered her. And he made sure that Crouch Sr. was first controlled and then murdered by his own Death Eater son. On a related note, I expected a mass escape from Azkaban in Book 6. Will we get one in Book 7? Some of the DEs, for example Dolohov, Mulciber, and the Lestrange brothers, were already serving life sentences and are unlikely to be let out again for good behavior, but with no Dementors to guard them and Voldemort being short-handed, surely he'll want them out again in Book 7? And Lucius Malfoy's sentence may be short since he's only charged with breaking and entering and attempted robbery. Or is being a Death Eater in itself sufficient grounds for a life sentence in Azkaban? Carol, who thinks that the Aurors, or at least Alastor Moody, deserve credit for hunting down the DEs after Godric's Hollow, whatever the failings of Crouch Sr. and Fudge may be From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Thu Jan 19 20:05:10 2006 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2006 20:05:10 -0000 Subject: The Evil of Voldemort; Lily's choice In-Reply-To: <43CFCD69.9090104@sprynet.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146718 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Bart Lidofsky wrote: > > amiabledorsai wrote: > >>Which, of > >>course, brings up the question again; why did he give Lily the > >>choice of living? Given Voldemort as one who gains pleasure in > >>the suffering of others, the obvious theory was that his intent > >>was to get Lily to give up Harry to save her own life (which, it > >>appears, Voldy fully expected her to do), and THEN kill her anyway. > >>Of course, there may be an ulterior motive, to be revealed in Book 7. > > > > After Prisoner of Azkaban, I was convinced that Lily was to be Peter's > > reward for his treason. Lately, I've been wondering if she was to be > > Snape's. > > Bart: > There is the "Snape loves Lily" theory, which has a lot of proponents > and opponents (I'm on the proponent side; it makes sense in reverse, in > that it would explain a lot of things). > > Bart > Carol notes: There is also the simple fact that Voldemort tells people who are in his way to "Stand aside." Not only does he repeatedly tell Lily to do so, he uses the exact phrase with the boy Hagrid in the Diary memory in CoS and with his own Death Eaters, who are interfering with his goal of killing Harry, in the graveyard scene in GoF. What matters, IMO, is not Voldemort's motivation in telling the "silly girl" (whom he elsewhere equates with his Muggle father) to stand aside; it's the fact that Lily had that option and chose not to take it. Her determination to protect Harry and her willingness to die to protect him are what matters. It's *Lily* who begs Voldemort to "kill me instead." Maybe "instead" is the key word. Unlike James, she's not fighting LV and doesn't "have" to be killed. In LV's view, she's just a nuisance and an obstacle. He expects to be obeyed; she'll "step aside" when ordered, either out of fear or because she values her life over her son's. When she doesn't, he kills her. But he doesn't realize that in offering her life for Harry's, she has changed everything, bringing into play the ancient magic which he knew about but had forgotten. She *chose* to sacrifice her life for Harry's rather than "stand aside" and save her own. (And, yes, I've read the interviews, but JKR is sneaky and it's canon that counts.) Carol, doubting that LV had any motive at all at GH other than killing Harry to thwart the Prophecy and believing that it's *Lily's* choice that matters From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Thu Jan 19 20:33:06 2006 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2006 20:33:06 -0000 Subject: The Evil of Voldemort; Lily's choice In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146720 Carol: When she doesn't, he kills her. But he doesn't realize > that in offering her life for Harry's, she has changed everything, > bringing into play the ancient magic which he knew about but had > forgotten. She *chose* to sacrifice her life for Harry's rather than > "stand aside" and save her own. (And, yes, I've read the interviews, > but JKR is sneaky and it's canon that counts.) > > Carol, doubting that LV had any motive at all at GH other than killing > Harry to thwart the Prophecy and believing that it's *Lily's* choice > that matters Alla: I really don't see how one thing contradicts another. Lily's choice matters A LOT, of course it does. But are you saying that when JKR said that Voldemort was truly prepared to let Lily live (paraphrase, but pretty sure that the gist is correct - it is in July 16, 2005 Interview, for those who want to check), she lied? I do think that JKR is not that sneaky as we think, BUT her sneakiness IMO has nothing to do with that answer, unless one can prove that she lies in the interviews IMO. She answered directly IMO - Voldemort WAS about to let Lily live. What is the reason, we don't know, of course, BUT such reason exists IMO. I think that "Lily as a reward for Snape" is just as possible as any other. It does not cast Snape in a very good light,that is for sure IMO. Don't forget that JKR also said that "that awful boy" from whom Petunia learned about dementors is important. It could be anybody of those four guys of course, but since JKR hinted that it is important, I personally doubt that it was James. Amiable Dorsai: > After Prisoner of Azkaban, I was convinced that Lily was to be Peter's > reward for his treason. Lately, I've been wondering if she was to be > Snape's. > Alla: Oh, me too, me too. I keep thinking that LOLLYPOPS will come to be true, but in the form of romantic love, but of obsession on Snape's behalf. I really don't find it so hard to imagine that Lily was to be Snape's reward, not at all. On the other hand, I won't discard "Peter" as possibility either. There should be something to the JKR statement that Lily was a popular girl. We KNOW that Remus liked her, even thought he did not compete with James. I will not be so surprised if it will turn out that Peter loved her too. Hmmmm, and Snape and Sirius? Nah, THAT would be an overkill, IMO :-). Alla, who knows that it would be cheesy and melodramatic, but sometimes cannot stop from wishing that Lily's ghost would appear and give Snape a good slap. From katmac at katmac.cncdsl.com Thu Jan 19 20:48:35 2006 From: katmac at katmac.cncdsl.com (lagattalucianese) Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2006 20:48:35 -0000 Subject: Book 1 Questions In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146721 Sherry: > > > 2. The Malfoy's are suppose to be "upper crust" in the WW and, > > according to Draco,"...mother's up the street looking at wands," > > (Ch. 5, Pg 77). Mr. Ollivander states, The wand chooses the > > wizard." (Ch. 5, Pg 85). Is Mrs. Malfoy buying Draco's wand while > > he's being fitted for robes? Would a wand that did not choose the > > wizard be good enough for the Malfoy's son, considering their > > standing in the WW? > > Richard again: > > I always saw it as either of two things: Narcissa making sure that > Olivander's had wands in stock suitable to someone of the Malfoy's > standing, or Narcissa shopping for another wand to go with some new > robes she may have purchased. After all, there is nothing in the > books that indicates that there can be only one wand for each > wizard, and the Malfoy's strike me as folk who would want even > their wands to be coordinated with their clothes and jewelry. > La Gatta Lucianese: Wizarding families can be rather offhanded where wands of school-age wizards are concerned. Ron chooses his second wand (or it chooses him), but his first one, the one trashed by the Whomping Willow, is a hand-me-down from brother Charlie. So it may be that a parent or elder sibling can select a wand for a kid, and everything is fine as long as the wand itself has no serious objections. Pne question that has always puzzled me: How did Ron come to inherit something as personal as a wand from an older brother? Surely Charlie would want to hang onto his wand? Or was it a hand-me-down to Charlie as well, from Bill or one of his parents, and when he graduated and got a job, he got a wand that selected him? (I should think that a wand that had had to work its way down through the Weasley ranks would be rather spiritless and not to be relied upon, but what do I know?) It's interesting that per JKR's Web site, this first wand, the hand- me-down, was of wood that matched Ron's birthdate in the Celtic system. Why, then, did JKR make it a hand-me-down? Was this for humorous effect, to emphasize the Weasleys' impecunious situation? From alex at wingedheels.com Thu Jan 19 20:51:19 2006 From: alex at wingedheels.com (wingedheels) Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2006 20:51:19 -0000 Subject: DD, Snape, Phoenix etc. Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146722 I'm Delurking. I did study the archives and hopefully I am not repeating forgone conclusions, BUT: IMO Snape has become the most interesting character in Harry's life. I believe that he is still WITH DD.As some have written, no way would DD plead for his life. So was Snape really killing DD, or could DD have been someone or something else at the time of Snape's curse? Wormtail maybe? I wonder this because in the beginning DD tells Harry that it wouldn't be impossible for him to be impersonated "DD said" my favorite jam is raspberry." or: it was DD and he was making Snape complete the plan. (As HP had to in the cave.) The Phoenix is interesting too, as some have written HP thought he saw it sailing in the blue sky at DD's funeral...interesting that Phoenixes are regenerated through fire. But my one nagging question is: Can one person make several Unbreakable Vows in a lifetime? Because, couldn't it just be possible that that is why DD trusts Snape so fully? They made an unbreakable vow some years ago? And if this is so, and the DD/SS plan theory is true then He didn't want to kill DD, but DD begged him because he was going to die anyway and if Snape didn't kill him Snape himself would die? (remember in Hogsmead when he told HP that only Snape would do?) also: Ceridwen said: > And now, neither Snape nor Draco are useful. LV might > keep them around for window dressing, but they lost their > usefulness the minute they had to leave Hogwarts. IMO, if > they go back to LV, they're treading on thin ice. Explains Snape's reaction to HP's taunts of Cowardice... Thanks for letting me chime in!! Wingedheels From kelleyaynn at yahoo.com Thu Jan 19 21:27:06 2006 From: kelleyaynn at yahoo.com (kelleyaynn) Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2006 21:27:06 -0000 Subject: The seven potions challenge in SS/PS Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146723 Kelleyaynn: I am conducting a Harry Potter book club with some of my 7th and 8th graders, and a couple of the 7th graders came up with an interesting theory about the potions. Forgive me if this has come up before, as I haven't seen it yet. Just as the 7 challenges have been linked to the seven books of the series, these girls linked the potions to the 7 books. Here they are: The three potions that result in death: books 4, 5, 6 Two are nettle wine: books 2 and 3 or 1 and 2 - we had some disagreement over this in the book club. Book 3 is relatively innocuous in the scheme of the series (like nettle wine), and the other could possible be 1 or 2. One will take you forward: Book 1 or 2 (Since the first one brings Harry into the wizarding world, or two, since it introduces the horcruxes [though we don't know it at the time]) One will take you back: book 7, as it will take us back to a time without Voldemort. Not that there won't be deaths in book 7, but the girls thought that perhaps there wouldn't be a death that directly affects Harry (someone close, or like Cedric he witnesses and is traumatized by it). Any comments on their ideas? Kelleyaynn From GAP5685 at AOL.com Thu Jan 19 21:27:31 2006 From: GAP5685 at AOL.com (gwen_of_the_oaks) Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2006 21:27:31 -0000 Subject: Wands & Wizards (was: Book 1 Questions) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146724 Sherry asked: > > > > > 2. The Malfoy's are suppose to be "upper crust" in the WW and, > > > according to Draco,"...mother's up the street looking at wands," > > > (Ch. 5, Pg 77). Mr. Ollivander states, The wand chooses the > > > wizard." (Ch. 5, Pg 85). Is Mrs. Malfoy buying Draco's wand while he's being fitted for robes? Would a wand that did not choose the wizard be good enough for the Malfoy's son, considering their standing in the WW? > > Now Gwen: I always considered the "wand chooses the wizard" as important in certian situations, but not a practical necessity. A good parallel would be a muggle buying a musical instrument like violin: A virtuoso, or dedicated, talented musician would need to pick their own, hold each one, assess the quality of sound that each made, etc. Someone just learning or taking lessons for kicks could use a second- hand instrument or one that had been in the family, and it would not hinder their ability to learn or play. And so, in the wizarding world, there are many with average abilities, and no world-saving destiny, who do not have the need for a super-sensitive, high-performance wand. The Malfoys could be buying a wand based solely on looks or price. You know, "The most expensive dragon heartstring you have, please. At least 14 inches, and preferably a dark wood." Gwen From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Thu Jan 19 21:37:10 2006 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2006 21:37:10 -0000 Subject: The Evil of Voldemort; Lily's choice In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146725 Carol earlier: > > When she doesn't, he kills her. But he doesn't realize that in offering her life for Harry's, she has changed everything, bringing into play the ancient magic which he knew about but had forgotten. She *chose* to sacrifice her life for Harry's rather than "stand aside" and save her own. (And, yes, I've read the interviews, but JKR is sneaky and it's canon that counts.) > > > > Carol, doubting that LV had any motive at all at GH other than killing Harry to thwart the Prophecy and believing that it's *Lily's* choice that matters > > Alla responded: > I really don't see how one thing contradicts another. Lily's choice matters A LOT, of course it does. But are you saying that when JKR said that Voldemort was truly prepared to let Lily live (paraphrase, but pretty sure that the gist is correct - it is in July 16, 2005 Interview, for those who want to check), she lied? I do think that JKR is not that sneaky as we think, BUT her sneakiness IMO has nothing to do with that answer, unless one can prove that she lies in the interviews IMO. > > She answered directly IMO - Voldemort WAS about to let Lily live. What is the reason, we don't know, of course, BUT such reason exists IMO. Carol answers: Of course I'm not saying that JKR lied, but she does like to keep us speculating. :-) I'm only saying that Voldemort didn't care one way or another about Lily--he only wanted to kill Harry. If he had succeeded, no doubt he would have left her to her grief, which would have been worse than death because it would have been mixed with guilt and unbearable remorse. IMO, he would have considered his job done, turned on his heel and walked away. Possibly he thought Wormtail would take the task of killing Lily on himself; more likely, he didn't care. So, no, JKR isn't lying. She just (IMO) doesn't want to explain straight out that LV had no particular motive in letting Lily live. (Notice that JKR does beat about the bush in the interview; maybe she wants us to think there's more to it than there is. After all, some people speculate that Snape loved Lily and she wants to keep that avenue open. I, for one, don't think Snape's being DDM! depends on Lily, either.) As I pointed out upthread, Godric's Hollow is neither the first nor the last instance of LV telling people who are interfering with his goals or blocking his intended target to stand aside. He does the same thing in both CoS and GoF. And if he had really wanted Lily alive for whatever reason, surely he would have stunned her rather than killed her. He could have killed Harry, kidnapped the stunned Lily, and forced her to do his will. But IMO, killing Harry would have solved all his problems, eliminated the threat (no one else could destroy him), and "Muggle" Lily would not have mattered. She could not have hurt him, so he might as well let her live. Can you give me any *canonical* evidence (outside the interviews) that LV saw Lily as anything more than a "silly girl" or Harry's "Muggle mother"? Yes, I know that the Prophecy states that the *parents* had "thrice defied him" and he knew that Lily was a member of the Order of the Phoenix, whose members the DE's were picking off one by one. No doubt his attitude would have been entirely different if she had faced him, wand out, ready to do battle as James did. He would have been forced to take her seriously and would not have considered giving her the choice of life or death, any more than he considered giving that choice to James. Instead, he treats her dismissively both at GH ("silly girl") and in the graveyard, where he talks about James facing him "like a man, straight-backed and proud," contrasting that with "the woman's foolish sacrifice." (Quoting from memory, so I may be confusing CoS with GoF.) But my point is that Lily, unlike James, didn't have to die (in LV's view). She merely sacrificed herself "foolishly" and unnecessarily (in LV's view). And that "foolish" sacrifice, in *JKR's* view, makes Lily's sacrifice even more heroic than James's--because Lily didn't have to die and James did. And it's Lily, stepping unarmed in front of LV and offering herself in Harry's place, whose death confers the blood protection that James's death does not. (That, I think, is what JKR is trying to convey in the interview.) Again, Lily's choice to die, not LV's motivation in allowing that choice, is what matters. Once he told her to "stand aside," for whatever reason, he made the choice possible. And when she refused the chance to live and he killed her, the ancient magic was invoked. There is, IMO, no need to look for any motive beyond the desire to get down to the business of killing Harry in LV's words. To do so would be like saying, "Oh, he wanted Hagrid to live or he'd have killed him in CoS" or "He wanted the Death Eaters to live or he'd have killed them in GoF." The DEs and Hagrid were ordered to "stand aside" because they were in his way, preventing him from accomplishing his objective. I see no difference in his treatment of Lily, to whom he uses the exact same phrase. Again, LV's motive need not be anything more than not caring enough to kill her. She had the chance to live and chose not to, and in doing so, unwittingly invoked the ancient magic that led to the deflected AK. That's how I see it after repeated readings of all the books, and the interview doesn't change that perspective. Canon evidence might make me reconsider, but for now I see nothing *in the books* to support the contention that LV came to Godric's Hollow with the specific intention of killing James and Harry but letting Lily live. Carol, using up her last post of the day already! From bawilson at citynet.net Thu Jan 19 17:32:03 2006 From: bawilson at citynet.net (bawilson at citynet.net) Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2006 12:32:03 -0500 (EST) Subject: Structural Flaws? Perhaps, but judgment is premature. Message-ID: <28678564.1137691923018.JavaMail.administrator@webmail> No: HPFGUIDX 146726 LaGatta: "The first two books really are children's books--wonderful children's books, but children's books. I never really got off on _Goblet of Fire_, I think because I find competitive sports such a dead bore, ditto teenage angst, and _Half-Blood Prince_, though it has many wonderful moments, has serious structural flaws (like the back end sort of fell off the loading dock)." That last remark isn't really fair; JKR herself has said that books VI and VII are really a two-parter--just as in British schools years six and seven are regarded as the two parts of the Sixth Form (although she didn't say that in so many words); hence, any criticism of the structrure of HBP is IMHO premature. BAW From belviso at attglobal.net Thu Jan 19 21:53:04 2006 From: belviso at attglobal.net (sistermagpie) Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2006 21:53:04 -0000 Subject: Book 1 Questions In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146727 Donna > > 2. The Malfoy's are suppose to be "upper crust" in the WW and, > > according to Draco,"...mother's up the street looking at wands," > > (Ch. 5, Pg 77). Mr. Ollivander states, The wand chooses the > > wizard." (Ch. 5, Pg 85). Is Mrs. Malfoy buying Draco's wand while > > he's being fitted for robes? Would a wand that did not choose the > > wizard be good enough for the Malfoy's son, considering their > > standing in the WW? > > Richard: > > I always saw it as either of two things: Narcissa making sure that > Olivander's had wands in stock suitable to someone of the Malfoy's > standing, or Narcissa shopping for another wand to go with some new > robes she may have purchased. After all, there is nothing in the > books that indicates that there can be only one wand for each > wizard, and the Malfoy's strike me as folk who would want even their > wands to be coordinated with their clothes and jewelry. Magpie: I've always assumed that JKR just needed a throwaway reference to what wizards shop for to explain why this kid was alone and that she didn't mean anything by it with regards to Draco's not having a wand that was really is. Symbolically it seems very hard to be grow up without one. But I suspect Neville (and Ron early on) are the only kids we should really think of as using someone else's wand. I figured Narcissa could easily be going on ahead to look at wands for possibilities before Draco appears to try them. She could probably tell Ollivander some things about him that he could start with. Draco does say "looking at" instead of "buying." And you could certainly be right that she's looking at other wands as well for herself. It's actually maybe interesting to think of it from the pov of HBP where Narcissa is with Draco while he gets fitted for robes and the first thing we hear him say is that he's not a child and can shop by himself. He may felt the same way then and they indulged him by finding something else to do for a while. (Mostly he just needed to be alone with Harry dramatically.) -m From mandorino222 at yahoo.com Thu Jan 19 20:45:21 2006 From: mandorino222 at yahoo.com (mandorino222) Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2006 20:45:21 -0000 Subject: Harry the Horcrux Destroyer In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146728 > >Steve: > > > > By withholding details, Dumbledore has left Harry completely > > unprepared to tackle the remaining Horcruxes. I can accept > > that Dumbledore was busy and away from the castle frequently, > > but if he really valued Harry and accepted the task Harry had > > ahead of him, he would have taken a few seconds to talk to > > him, and would have set someone else the task of bringing > > Harry up to speed on curse breaking and Horcrux destroying. > > > Quick_Silver: > Maybe Dumbledore didn't feel that formal training in either > curse breaking or Horcrux destroying was what Harry needed > though. So it could be that Dumbledore didn't want to > put Harry in intensive training for skills that he might never > need. > > Rather I think that Harry should have been paying close > attention to Dumbledore's investigative skills his cunning at > getting information, the way that he connected dots and > followed through leads, and his knowledge of how Voldemort > works. And I do think that Dumbledore showed Harry those things > in HBP hence the pensieve trips to watch Dumbledore in action, > the task involving Slughorn, and the fact that Harry is > connected to Voldemort's mind and has been within it. Take as > an example how Harry got the memory from Slughorn the basis of > that idea, to get Slughorn drunk, was in Harry's head the day > that Ron was poisoned. So Harry has the right idea he just > needed the Felix potion to jingle the circumstances a little. An interesting thought that occurred to me while reading this post is that the task of getting the memory from Slughorn is in many ways like finding and destroying the horcruxes. Hermione notes that getting the memory from Slughorn is not a mission for which force is required, or Dumbledore would have either done it himself or assigned the job to someone with more magical experience. Rounding up and destroying the horcruxes, we must assume, is imilar in that respect. It has to be a job for which Harry's unique characteristics (parseltounge, abilitiy to love, ability to read Voldemort's mind, etc.) are uniquely suited. Therefore Harry will not need to know how to destroy a horcrux or how to prevent the curse from enveloping him, because one or more of his unusual/hidden powers will take care of that for him. We know from OOTP that Voldemort, even after the blood transformation, cannot possess Harry's body without experiencing serious physical pain. Perhaps Harry's nature will similarly repel curses from Voldemort's horcruxes? Maybe if Harry is, in fact, a horcrux, there's some provision in Voldemort's curse writing code that prevents the curse from one destroyed horcrux from destroying another? Also it fits nicely that in order to learn about horcruxes, Harry must succeed in the mini-horcruxish mission of getting the memory from Slughorn. Nick From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Thu Jan 19 22:13:41 2006 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2006 22:13:41 -0000 Subject: The Evil of Voldemort; Lily's choice In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146729 > Alla responded: > > She answered directly IMO - Voldemort WAS about to let Lily live. > What is the reason, we don't know, of course, BUT such reason exists > IMO. > > Carol answers: > So, no, JKR isn't lying. She just (IMO) doesn't want to explain > straight out that LV had no particular motive in letting Lily live. Alla: I see what you are saying, but I disagree. I absolutely don't see Voldemort leaving one of his victims alive for no reasons at all. Of course, JMO. Imagine the following RL analogy, which is of course rather loose, but all of RL analogies are IMO. Hired killer comes to the house to kill one member of the family. Do you see him leaving alive other members who turned out to be home by accident or something? If nothing else, why would he leave witnesses alive? No, I think that VERY particular reason existed why Lily could have been alive. Carol: > (Notice that JKR does beat about the bush in the interview; maybe she > wants us to think there's more to it than there is. After all, some > people speculate that Snape loved Lily and she wants to keep that > avenue open. I, for one, don't think Snape's being DDM! depends on > Lily, either.) Alla: Sorry, but to me she hints rather strongly that the reason why Lily could have been alive is important. Carol: > Can you give me any *canonical* evidence (outside the interviews) that > LV saw Lily as anything more than a "silly girl" or Harry's "Muggle > mother"? Yes, I know that the Prophecy states that the *parents* had > "thrice defied him" and he knew that Lily was a member of the Order of > the Phoenix, whose members the DE's were picking off one by one. Alla: Sure, to the best of my knowledge we don't have canonical evidence that Voldemort had specific interest in Lily except interview, but I believe the interviews - I believe that JKR was hinting the importance here. I think we will discover the reason in book 7, BUT it is actually irrelevant whether Voldemort specifically cared for Lily or not IF the reason for her to live was to be the reward for Snape or Peter ( Ewwwww in both instances). All that is necessary IMO is that Voldemort should care for Snape as in "value him" as the valuable member of his forces and willing to endulge his request. Now, if Jen's theory is correct - that Voldemort wanted specific information from Lily - THEN sure we will have to know about it in the last book and maybe we will. The bottom line is I just don't see Voldemort leaving Lily alive because he did not care enough to kill her. Even if he did not take her seriously as battle opponent, she could have call for help or something like that. Leaving a witness to the murder alive, leaving a mother alive with desire to avenge her sons and husbands deaths? I strongly doubt it. JMO, Alla From horridporrid03 at yahoo.com Thu Jan 19 22:37:05 2006 From: horridporrid03 at yahoo.com (horridporrid03) Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2006 22:37:05 -0000 Subject: The GoF Train Scene (was:Re: Humanity, Kant, Caricatures, and Draco) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146730 > >>a_svirn > Personally I never noticed Draco liking Cedric either. But suppose ? > for the sake of argument ? that he did. I find he chose a very > strange way of showing it. All that jeering and sneering at the > leaving feast, all that "Diggory was the first, you'll be the > second". Honestly. If that's how he treats people he *likes* I'd say > he certainly has the making of a fine Death Eater. Betsy Hp: The "jeering and sneering" is a factual mistake. A rather common one for some reason. (Perhaps Draco isn't bad enough in canon?) Draco stands with the rest of the students without commentary when Dumbledore toasts Cedric. When Dumbledore starts talking about Voldemort, Draco, "mutter[s] something to Crabbe and Goyle". The only other action he takes is to remain "defiantly" seated when Dumbledore toasts Harry. So no, there was no "jeering and sneering" at the Leaving Feast. At least, not on Draco's end. As to his final comment, that's not Draco trying to become Cedric's friend. That's Draco trying to put a good face on the fact that the boy he'd seen something admirable in has been labeled worthless by the side Draco has been taught is the right side. I think we're witnessing Draco shutting down or boxing off his compassion. Which, yes, starts him down the path to becoming a Death Eater (possibly of Regulus's or Snape's ilk) and also makes him ripe for Occlumency lessons. Of course, in HBP, Voldemort makes the mistake of labeling Draco's family as worthless. And I think Draco's journey to becoming a Death Eater comes to a screeching halt. Betsy Hp From bboyminn at yahoo.com Thu Jan 19 22:42:20 2006 From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2006 22:42:20 -0000 Subject: Patronus issues (was ChapDisc: HBP8, Snape Victorious) In-Reply-To: <14.54342a02.3100187d@aol.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146731 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Wink45zes at a... wrote: > > bboyminn: > > First, I think we frequently become confunded more by what we don't > know than by what we do know. For example, we don't know that a > Patronus has to stay visible for the whole time that it exists. We > also don't know that it must travel in realtime by 'real' methods. > > Wink: > True enough, but what I am feeling confunded by is trying to > make what little we do know about the Patronus Charm from book > three work with this new action that a Patronus can perform. > ... > > > bboyminn: > > Well before we get bogged down in security problems let's > acknowledge security advantages. First, a Patronus has no > solid form and thereforecan not be harmed. Since it can not > be harmed, it can not be compelled to give up it's message. > ... > > Wink: > Ah, here we run up against a pet peeve of mine. Rowling does > indeed say that a patronus is "anit-Dark" magic on her web > site, but it is never said to be so in the books. bboyminn: The Dementors are clearly dark, dangerous, and destructive creatures, I don't think we need any more than that to consider them 'Dark'. My main point was that since Patronus have no substantial physical form or substance, they can't be harmed, and if they can't be harmed, they can't be coerced. If a Partonus were somehow, though extremely unlikely, trapped, it could simply 'terminate' itself; it could simply cease to exist. That would certainly stop anyone from getting the message. Though I will confess that I think trying to trap an insubstantial Patronus is about like trying to trap the wind in a tea strainer; good luck with that. > Winks continues: > > I'm an old-fashioned gal, and firmly believe the books should > provide adequate and correct information. ...I really object > when it is used to change what is in the books themselves. > bboyminn: First we know that the messenger aspect of a Patronus is something conceived and refined by Dumbledore. No one else has figured this out. So, I really don't see any inconsistency; either that or I don't understand your comment. > Winks continues: > > A Patronus can of course be used against other forms of attack > ...then just a dementor. Harry used one against the boggart in > the maze,.... Harry's Patronus also effectively took care of the > Malfoy / Crabb./ Goyle / Flint fake 'dementor' at the > Quidditch match. ... > bboyminn: We constantly see missed spells having significant impact, and doing things the spell is not designed to do. In a sense, a spell is a form of directed energy. When it is on target, the energy is released in it's intended form with the intended results, but when the spell misses it's target or purpose, we have a random discharge of undirected energy usually causing some physical effect like knocking plaster off the wall etc.... So, the fact that the misused Patronus worked in the situations you suggested is not a function of the spell but a by-product of the spell misused and misdirected. > bboyminn: > > We don't know the extent of the Patronus Messenger. Maybe they > do travel in realtime and are therefore only good for short > distance messages. If they do not travel in realtime then logic > would assume that distance is not significant barrier to them. > They could near instantly deliver a message halfway around the > world. > > Wink: > I have a really hard time wrapping myself around the idea of a > Patronus time-traveling. ... > bboyminn: The opposite of 'real-time' is not time travel. Real-time means that if you walk, you walk like a normal person. In the example I gave, if a cat walks at 2 mile per hour, and your Patronus is a cat then it can only move at 2 miles per hour. That is real time. Apparation, Portkey, and probably Floo travel are not real-time. The movement through space is grossly disproportionate to the distance traveled. For example, when they Portkeyed from Stoades Head Hill to somewhere in probably Scotland for the World Cup, there is some sense of time, space, and movement, but that sense is not in proportion to the distance traveled. Let's make conservative best guesses and say that they Portkeyed 300 miles in 15 seconds. That's 72,000 miles per hour. THAT is not real-time travel, but neither is it 'time travel'. If Patronus travel in real-time and a Stag can travel at 10 mph, then it takes 50 hours to travel from Hogwarts to London (assuming 500 miles). If a Patronus can travel in magical time, then that same trip might take from a few seconds to a couple of minutes. That is not 'real-time' travel; it's magical-time travel, which is very much different than magical time-travel. The whole point I was making is that we can't assume Patronus is the standard, common, or preferred method of communication for the Order. I speculated that even under the best of circumstances, Patronus Messenger was reserved for urgent and critical communcation. Routine communication would use routine methods. > bboyminn: > > I suspect that in the instance of Tonks trying to contact > Hagrid or Dumbledore summoning Hagrid to the location of the > Barty Sr attack, there were no messages. The mere presents of > a recognisable Patronus would have cause people to come and > investigate. ... > > Wink: > I daresay that simply pointing in a direction is inadequate > for me. I sure don't have an accurate compass in my head, and > I've yet to see any indication of that talent among wizards. > ...edited... bboyminn: You seem to be taking my statements of ASPECTS of Patronus communication as the SINGLE definitive statement of method. I'm not saying Patronus is limited to non-verbal communication, just that in some situations a verbal message in not nevessarily necessary. I gave those two example of situation in which a verbal message would not be necessary. Hagrid seeing Dumbledore's Patronus would have known that Dumbledore would never send it unless there was trouble, so THERE IS TROUBLE, no explanation needed. In the case of Tonk, she may have, but didn't necessarily have to send a verbal message that was intercepted by Snape. She may have simply sent her recognisable Partonus to that Great Hall assuming that is where Hagrid was, Snape saw it and came to investigate. Everyone was so freaked out at the idea that Snape intercepted a message meant for Hagrid, I thought I would simply point out that we don't know that there actually was a verbal message. Snape may have simply seen the Patronus and that is all he need. Again, my point is that we are making assumptions not in evidence. We know Tonks sent a Patronus, but we don't know that that Patronus contained a verbal message. Tonk may have simply said (mentally/nonverbally) when creating the Patronus 'go to the Great Hall and alert Hagrid'. That is an instruction for action, not a verbal message. If she had framed it as 'find Hagrid where ever he is and tell him 'Harry is waiting at the front gate''. Then the Patronus would have acted differently. I'm not saying that's what she did, I'm saying that since we don't know, we can't make assumptions about the presences and nature of both the instruction and the potential message. > Winks continues: > I note that it says "made contact," and not "arrived there," > which to me means Snape did not run down to Hogsmeade and > Apparate to Grimauld Place. He sent a complex message; ... > bboyminn: And elsewhere in my post I gave a more common illustration of a Patronus carrying a verbal message in the voice of the sender. The limitation I set was that the Patronus couldn't engage in dialog; it is like a recording, it simply replays the message it was given. It also does not take a response. All speculation on my part, but speculation toward a workable description of the likely nature of the Patronus; ...the likely nature of a /workable/ Patronus. We know the Order uses Patronus, but we also know, or at least, it seems, that they do not use the routinely. I'm speculating on workable limitation that would put the use of the Patronus in a workable context. > bboyminn: > > Part of what I'm trying to say is that give our noticable lack of > information on the nature of the Patrous as a messenger, we really > can't accurately speculate on how good or bad a messenger they are. > > Wink: > Ah, my mistake I believe. I was not concerned with whether or > nota Patronus was a good or bad messenger. I am trying to work > out if the devise of a Patronus as messenger works in all its > details, however we can find or imagine them or if it is poorly > conceived. My problem is that the previously described > actions/abilities of a Patronus just don't jive with this > new use. > > > > > Marianne: > > > > I wonder if there is some sort of additional spell on the > > OoP Patronuses to protect these messages from being told to > > someone not in the Order, sort of a magical encryption. ... > > > > bboyminn: > > I guess it is a matter of prespective and assumption, if you > assume the Patronus Messenger is flawed then of course you > will react accordingly. If you assume that it is a worthy > messenger, then evenlacking the details you will assume there > is a reasonable explanation. It's a case of determining in your > own mind whether the glass is half full or half empty. > > Wink: > It is not so much that I think the messenger-patronus is flawed, > just perhaps simply misnamed, or ill defined. ... > > Perhaps the real difficulty is that Rowling is using the same > name for two different things. This messenger Patronus is > something new that Dumbledore developed, and taught only to > members of the Order of the Phoenix. It is based upon the > Patronus Charm, but he has made something completely new of it. > ... > > Thanks all for your patience and help while I slogged my way > through this problem to a workable solution. > > Wink bboyminn: I think perhaps were are all over thinking the Messenger Patronus. I would assume that Dumbledore discovered that if he simply made his Patronus appear at a particular location, say the Order Headquarters, the people there would take that as a sign that Dumbledore was in trouble. Next it occurred to him that he could get the Patronus to relay a short verbal message. In a sense, it could act like a recording device, and play back his words to the intended receiver of the message. I don't see this as a complete re-invention of the Patronus. He simply realized an aspect of the Patronus that no one else had ever realized before. The central theme of everything I've said is that we are making extreme assumption based on ...well ...assumptions. Everyone is up in arms because Snape intercepted a message from Tonks Patronus which had an intended recipient of Hagrid. Well, first you are assuming there WAS a verbal message, next you are assuming that Snape heard it. Neither of which is in evidence. Snape became aware of Tonks Patronus and came to investigate, that much speculation we can say with reasonable sureness, but beyond that is unfounded speculation. On a last note, I seems more than reasonable that the Trio will learn the Patronus Messenger charm in the next book. We knew about Apparation long before we had the details from Harry's point of view. We have known about Patronus Messengers for several books, though mostly through implication. Now in the last book, we will finally get the details. Just a few rambling thoughts. Steve/bboyminn From quick_silver71 at yahoo.ca Thu Jan 19 22:47:10 2006 From: quick_silver71 at yahoo.ca (quick_silver71) Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2006 22:47:10 -0000 Subject: Harry the Horcrux Destroyer In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146732 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "mandorino222" wrote: >Nick: Rounding up and destroying the horcruxes, we must assume, is > imilar in that respect. It has to be a job for which Harry's > unique characteristics (parseltounge, abilitiy to love, ability > to read Voldemort's mind, etc.) are uniquely suited. Therefore > Harry will not need to know how to destroy a horcrux or how to > prevent the curse from enveloping him, because one or more of > his unusual/hidden powers will take care of that for him. > > We know from OOTP that Voldemort, even after the blood > transformation, cannot possess Harry's body without experiencing > serious physical pain. Perhaps Harry's nature will similarly > repel curses from Voldemort's horcruxes? Maybe if Harry is, in > fact, a horcrux, there's some provision in Voldemort's curse > writing code that prevents the curse from one destroyed horcrux > from destroying another? > > Also it fits nicely that in order to learn about horcruxes, Harry > must succeed in the mini-horcruxish mission of getting the memory > from Slughorn. But I've always assumed that there is no curse when a Horcrux was destroyed...the curse that got Dumbledore's hand was unique protection for the ring wasn't it? I don't remember there being a curse on the diary when it was desttroyed. Quick_Silver From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Thu Jan 19 22:55:41 2006 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2006 22:55:41 -0000 Subject: Draco and Cedric. Was Draco's world turned upside down? WAS The GoF Train Scene In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146733 > Betsy Hp: > As to his final comment, that's not Draco trying to become Cedric's > friend. That's Draco trying to put a good face on the fact that the > boy he'd seen something admirable in has been labeled worthless by the > side Draco has been taught is the right side. I think we're > witnessing Draco shutting down or boxing off his compassion. Which, > yes, starts him down the path to becoming a Death Eater (possibly of > Regulus's or Snape's ilk) and also makes him ripe for Occlumency > lessons. Alla: But I doubt that the compassion was there in the first place. Basically what you argue is that because Draco cheered for Cedric that means that Draco liked him, NOT just cheered for him because "Cedric wins means Harry looses", but as you are saying Draco saw something admirable in Cedric? Is that the correct recap of your position? I just don't see how you arrive to that conclusion. Draco IMO would cheer for anybody if that means that the person will beat Harry. I just see no signs in canon that Draco liked Cedric as "Cedric" as I said in my earlier post. I think that Draco's world was not shaken up that badly in GoF or even was not shaken up at all - the enemies remained enemies and friends remained friends. Now, I don't know how Draco felt about Fake! Moody after all, but I am hesitant to consider the revelation that his teacher turned out to be DE in disguise as huge shake - up of Draco's world. IMO Draco knew pretty well who Cedric and Krum are to him and he shows it nicely when he mocks Cedric's death. Now, as to Krum I am not sure at all, why would Draco consider him to be the enemy now. Krum DOES go to Durmstrang, Krum IS a star quidditch player, so I think Draco may continue to want to worship him. Personally, I think Draco is his usual arrogant self at the end of GoF. Now, in HBP he of course shaken up pretty badly, but the reasons for that could be very diverse. Too tired after almost killing two students and that is why unable to kill Albus or indeed seeing the error of his ways and maybe beginning to change? We shall see. JMO, Alla From miles at martinbraeutigam.de Thu Jan 19 23:01:00 2006 From: miles at martinbraeutigam.de (Miles) Date: Fri, 20 Jan 2006 00:01:00 +0100 Subject: Book 1 Questions References: Message-ID: <00e801c61d4c$37fa7a40$14b2a8c0@rechnerchen> No: HPFGUIDX 146734 lagattalucianese wrote: > Wizarding families can be rather offhanded where wands of school-age > wizards are concerned. Ron chooses his second wand (or it chooses > him), but his first one, the one trashed by the Whomping Willow, is a > hand-me-down from brother Charlie. So it may be that a parent or > elder sibling can select a wand for a kid, and everything is fine as > long as the wand itself has no serious objections. Miles: We know this of Neville's wand as well, he uses his father's wand. So, even if we put in account the very special relationship of Neville and his Gran, it's obviously not standard that a wizard gets his own and new wand when he starts at Hogwarts. I'd suppose that the wand is some kind of ancient or at least old family possession. Maybe this is one reason for Ron to be so upset about the damage after the collision with the Whomping Willow in CoS. lagattalucianese wrote: > It's interesting that per JKR's Web site, this first wand, the hand- > me-down, was of wood that matched Ron's birthdate in the Celtic > system. Why, then, did JKR make it a hand-me-down? Was this for > humorous effect, to emphasize the Weasleys' impecunious situation? Miles: Could be just a coincidence. Or it was the reason for the Weasleys to give new wand to Charlie, so that Ron could use his old one. And I do not see the poorness of the Weasleys as a humorous effect at all, not in this situation, nor anywhere in the entire series. At the most, the effects of it are tragicomically, but mostly Harry is really sorry for Ron, and Ron is ashamed when this problem is touched. Two of the main characters of Hogwarts students do not have or had "own" wands, and we only know of few wand origins at all. So for me, JKR wants to show us that getting a new wand of his or her own for an eleven year old kid is not standard in the wizarding world. Miles From amiabledorsai at yahoo.com Thu Jan 19 23:39:05 2006 From: amiabledorsai at yahoo.com (amiabledorsai) Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2006 23:39:05 -0000 Subject: The GoF Train Scene (was:Re: Humanity, Kant, Caricatures, and Draco) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146735 > Betsy Hp: > The "jeering and sneering" is a factual mistake. A rather common one > for some reason. (Perhaps Draco isn't bad enough in canon?) Draco > stands with the rest of the students without commentary when > Dumbledore toasts Cedric. When Dumbledore starts talking about > Voldemort, Draco, "mutter[s] something to Crabbe and Goyle". The > only other action he takes is to remain "defiantly" seated when > Dumbledore toasts Harry. > > So no, there was no "jeering and sneering" at the Leaving Feast. At > least, not on Draco's end. The "jeering and sneering" happens later, on the train ride home. Draco and his bookends barge in on the Trio in their compartment, and Draco is his usual charming self: "You've picked the losing side, Potter! I warned you! I told you you ought to choose your company more carefully, remember? When we met on the train, first day at Hogwarts? I told you not to hang around with riffraff like this!" He jerked his head at Ron and Hermione. "Too late now. Potter! They'll be the first to go, now the Dark Lord's back! Mudbloods and Muggle-lovers first! Well - second - Diggory was the f-" Then Draco gets a quick lesson in interpersonal relations from the Trio plus Fred and George. Amiable Dorsai From gav_fiji at yahoo.com Fri Jan 20 00:00:06 2006 From: gav_fiji at yahoo.com (Goddlefrood) Date: Fri, 20 Jan 2006 00:00:06 -0000 Subject: Significant Dates Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146736 JKR has ststed in interviews that the dates in Harry Potter are of great significance. As a teaser for a substantial post on this, and I would also like to be told if there is no interest out there, I give an overview of the siginifcant events of 382 B.C. Two births of significance to the later Macedonian empire expansion are those of Philip II (Alexnader the Great's father) and Antigonus (a general under Alexander the Great and after A the G's death one of those who divided up the Macedonian Empire). Meanwhile in the Hellenic Republic intrigues were ongoing between Athens and Sparta some twenty two years after the conclusion of the Pelopennesian Wars. In Rome (then a Republic) the nascent state was still finding its feet. Additionally if anyone out there knows of any other possibly significant events, either real or as stated in fiction then I would be pleased to be enlightened. Goddlefrood From a_svirn at yahoo.com Fri Jan 20 00:57:46 2006 From: a_svirn at yahoo.com (a_svirn) Date: Fri, 20 Jan 2006 00:57:46 -0000 Subject: The GoF Train Scene (was:Re: Humanity, Kant, Caricatures, and Draco) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146737 > Betsy Hp: > The "jeering and sneering" is a factual mistake. A rather common one > for some reason. (Perhaps Draco isn't bad enough in canon?) Draco > stands with the rest of the students without commentary when > Dumbledore toasts Cedric. When Dumbledore starts talking about > Voldemort, Draco, "mutter[s] something to Crabbe and Goyle". The only > other action he takes is to remain "defiantly" seated when Dumbledore > toasts Harry. > > So no, there was no "jeering and sneering" at the Leaving Feast. At > least, not on Draco's end. a_svirn: Um, yes. I stand corrected. It was muttering and refusing to honour Cedric at the feast. Jeering or, to be more precise, smirking came later ? in the compartment of the Hogwarts Express. As well as the infamous comment about Cedric's being the first to go. Does it make any difference? Somehow I don't think so. If Draco is capable of behaving like this to the people he *likes* he must be thoroughly rotten. > Betsy Hp: > As to his final comment, that's not Draco trying to become Cedric's > friend. a_svirn: Obviously. > Betsy Hp: That's Draco trying to put a good face on the fact that the > boy he'd seen something admirable in has been labeled worthless by the > side Draco has been taught is the right side. I think we're > witnessing Draco shutting down or boxing off his compassion. a_svirn: I am really curious how you've worked out that one. How do you even know that Draco is capable of compassion? Or are you working on the assumption that he simply cannot be as bad as he looks ? ergo he must be shutting down and boxing off his inherent kindness? From a_svirn at yahoo.com Fri Jan 20 01:08:36 2006 From: a_svirn at yahoo.com (a_svirn) Date: Fri, 20 Jan 2006 01:08:36 -0000 Subject: When will the ministry start kicking butt and taking names? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146738 > Carol: > On a related note, I expected a mass escape from Azkaban in Book 6. > Will we get one in Book 7? Some of the DEs, for example Dolohov, > Mulciber, and the Lestrange brothers, were already serving life > sentences and are unlikely to be let out again for good behavior, but > with no Dementors to guard them and Voldemort being short-handed, > surely he'll want them out again in Book 7? And Lucius Malfoy's > sentence may be short since he's only charged with breaking and > entering and attempted robbery. Or is being a Death Eater in itself > sufficient grounds for a life sentence in Azkaban? a_svirn: It is entirely possible that they are not in a hurry to escape. Certainly Lucius is better off exactly where he is. Was he even tried at all by the way? If he wasn't it makes him not a convict but rather a detainee, so he can probably arrange his own release when the time is right. (Which is to say, when it's clear which side is winning). From katmac at katmac.cncdsl.com Fri Jan 20 01:27:55 2006 From: katmac at katmac.cncdsl.com (lagattalucianese) Date: Fri, 20 Jan 2006 01:27:55 -0000 Subject: Dumbledore's Trusting Nature In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146739 > > Finwitch: > > I agree -- I think that the only ways for a (born?) Legilimens not to > use this skill on people are trust and avoidance of eye-contact. We > have seen that Dumbledore 'X-rayed' Harry if he had reason to doubt > (like when he asked about Harry's name in a goblet.) Dumbledore knows > that the only way he can act normally with people is to trust them. > > Finwitch > La Gatta Lucianese: It must be hell to be a Legilimens. Your observation reminds me of a science fiction story I read many years ago, of which I cannot remember the title or the author, in which a long-suffering telepath shouts at some government snooper-pooper, "I don't CARE what you think! I am NOT interested in your relationship with your wife and your girlfriend! It is a matter of profound INdifference to me that your kids have chicken pox and the dog needs washing!" Or words to that effect. As I recall, one of the first duties of the organization that trained newly discovered telepaths was to teach them to block all the subliminal jabber going on around them; if they didn't learn to do this, they went mad. I am still waiting for JKR to introduce little Miss Granger into a Legilimency class. The effect on Snape could make for some really delicious shipping news. From horridporrid03 at yahoo.com Fri Jan 20 02:15:08 2006 From: horridporrid03 at yahoo.com (horridporrid03) Date: Fri, 20 Jan 2006 02:15:08 -0000 Subject: The GoF Train Scene (was:Re: Humanity, Kant, Caricatures, and Draco) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146740 > >>Betsy Hp: > > > > So no, there was no "jeering and sneering" at the Leaving > > Feast. At least, not on Draco's end. > >>a_svirn: > Um, yes. I stand corrected. It was muttering and refusing to > honour Cedric at the feast. Betsy Hp: Well, no. There was *no* refusal to honor Cedric at the Leaving Feast. Again, this is a popularly believed error, but it is still an error. Draco muttered something to Crabbe and Goyle when Voldemort is mentioned. > >>a_svirn: > Jeering or, to be more precise, smirking came later ? in the > compartment of the Hogwarts Express. As well as the infamous > comment about Cedric's being the first to go. Does it make > any difference? > Betsy Hp: It goes towards my main point, yes. Draco stands for Cedric, but he doesn't stand for Harry. So it's not peer pressure pulling him to his feet. There's something there. Something he has to learn to deny or push down because Cedric was killed by Voldemort. And Draco is on Voldemort's side, so Cedric must be an enemy. > >>a_svirn: > I am really curious how you've worked out that one. How do you > even know that Draco is capable of compassion? Or are you working > on the assumption that he simply cannot be as bad as he looks ? > ergo he must be shutting down and boxing off his inherent kindness? Betsy Hp: Draco loves his parents. (See HBP) And since the "Draco is evil" arguments have made up facts I really don't think I'm stretching things to see something good in him . I've never seen Draco as an entirely bad child. Haven't since we first meet him in PS/SS. > >>Alla: > But I doubt that the compassion was there in the first place. > Basically what you argue is that because Draco cheered for Cedric > that means that Draco liked him, NOT just cheered for him > because "Cedric wins means Harry looses", but as you are saying > Draco saw something admirable in Cedric? Is that the correct recap > of your position? I just don't see how you arrive to that > conclusion. Draco IMO would cheer for anybody if that means that > the person will beat Harry. Betsy Hp: Ooh... *Anybody*? Like, say Hermione? No, I'm pretty sure that if Draco found something obviously wrong with Cedric (muggleborn, blood- traitor, etc.) he'd have bagged Cedric completely and gone whole hog for Krum. But Cedric is a pureblood son (or pure enough, anyway) of a Ministry wizard who wasn't an Order member or hugely known Dumbledore supporter. The entire point of Cedric is that he's an inoffensive character. There's nothing there to dislike. > >>Alla: > I just see no signs in canon that Draco liked Cedric as "Cedric" > as I said in my earlier post. > Betsy Hp: Draco doesn't need to like Cedric for Cedric. I'm not going that far with this. It's a niggling thing that Draco's having to face. Here's this inoffensive boy that Draco cheered for, that Draco had some positive thoughts about, and he's killed by Draco's side. And then Krum being misused gets piled on top of that, and finally Fake!Moody turns out to be on Draco's side. I doubt Draco would have called Voldemort's opening salvo going down this way. > >>Alla: > Now, I don't know how Draco felt about Fake!Moody after all, but I > am hesitant to consider the revelation that his teacher turned out > to be DE in disguise as huge shake - up of Draco's world. > Betsy Hp: I'll go out on a limb and guess that Draco had pretty negative feelings towards Fake!Moody . And, yeah, I doubt it was fun to realize that the abusive psycho you'd like to have fired is actually on your side. Betsy Hp From ceridwennight at hotmail.com Fri Jan 20 02:32:15 2006 From: ceridwennight at hotmail.com (Ceridwen) Date: Fri, 20 Jan 2006 02:32:15 -0000 Subject: When will the ministry start kicking butt and taking names? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146741 > maria816200: > > > > But I think [t]hat the MOM will not start kicking butt > in the beginning of book 7, as they will only do that when the final > battle is over when Voldemort is defeated? In short, more like what > they did in VW1, (rounding up the DE when Voldemort was vanguish/gone) > or after the battle in the MOM in the OOTP. They are good at that > picking up the wasted/defenseless DEs. The MOM doesn't do the hard > fight/work, what they do is, let the brave and the courageous do the > hard and messy job and when it's over, MoM will just clean up the litters. Carol: *(snip)* > Granted, Moody was a member of the original Order, but he was also a > Ministry employee in VW1. So, apparently, was Scrimgeour. It remains > to be seen what he will do against the DEs in Book 7. > > Also, Voldemort clearly regarded Amanda Bones as a real threat or he > would not have personally murdered her. And he made sure that Crouch > Sr. was first controlled and then murdered by his own Death Eater son. Ceridwen: I'm not so sure I would want the MoM to have enormous powers to go after people. I thought it was bad that they sent Sirius to prison without a trial. I would rather see them hampered and hobbled by laws against certain behaviors, because by virtue of being the government they are already very powerful. Ceridwen. From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Fri Jan 20 02:54:14 2006 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Fri, 20 Jan 2006 02:54:14 -0000 Subject: The GoF Train Scene (was:Re: Humanity, Kant, Caricatures, and Draco) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146742 > Betsy Hp: > Well, no. There was *no* refusal to honor Cedric at the Leaving > Feast. Again, this is a popularly believed error, but it is still > an error. Draco muttered something to Crabbe and Goyle when > Voldemort is mentioned. Alla: Draco stands up BEFORE it is mentioned that Cedric died at the hands of Lord Voldemort, so IMO he has no problem and no hesitation in taking sides. As soon as Dumbledore says that Cedric died at the hands of Voldemort, who returned, Draco starts muttering. The quote is too long to type, but it is not like Dumbledore talks about Voldemort separately from talking about Cedric. See p.722 of GoF paperback, am.ed. > > >>a_svirn: > > I am really curious how you've worked out that one. How do you > > even know that Draco is capable of compassion? Or are you working > > on the assumption that he simply cannot be as bad as he looks ? > > ergo he must be shutting down and boxing off his inherent kindness? > > Betsy Hp: > Draco loves his parents. (See HBP) And since the "Draco is evil" > arguments have made up facts I really don't think I'm stretching > things to see something good in him . I've never seen Draco as > an entirely bad child. Haven't since we first meet him in PS/SS. Alla: Yes, I understand the part of your argument that you never saw Draco as entirely bad child. What I don't understand is where in canon it is shown that Draco has compassion to anybody besides his parents. Voldemort loved his mother too. Does it make him a compassionate person? I am also not sure how " the made up facts" in "Draco is evil" arguments show that Draco is a compassionate person. What "made up" facts are those, by the way? I would like to know in order not to use them in my arguments :-) I think I have enough of real ones :-) JMO, Alla, who goes to iron her hands right now From Nanagose at aol.com Fri Jan 20 03:40:36 2006 From: Nanagose at aol.com (spotsgal) Date: Fri, 20 Jan 2006 03:40:36 -0000 Subject: Spies, Lies and Self fullfilling prophecies In-Reply-To: <80f25c3a0601190519t6424ce7m4f399cae94f5385a@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146743 > Pippin, regarding Lupin's and Sirius's plan to kill Peter in the > Shrieking Shack: > Lupin was about to betray everything his closest friends believed > in, everything for which they had fought, suffered and died. It's a > poor way to honor their sacrifice. > Debbie: > But why does that make Lupin a traitor and Sirius not so? Sirius' > obsession with killing Peter equally betrays what his closest > friends believed in. In fact, Sirius *invited* Lupin to join him in > killing Peter. Is it the Azkaban effect -- Sirius' desire to kill > is excused because he is reckless and crazed with anger, while Lupin > is too calm and reflective to be given credit for such feelings? Christina: Exactly, and you're not even taking into account Harry, who I'd argue shows the same desire for revenge, willingness to kill and injure (although he shows a lack of ability the first couple of times he tries), and betrayal of "everything his closest friends believed in." Harry, whose first reaction to Sirius Black isn't to get help or run, but to kill him in revenge. Harry, whose first reaction to the death of Sirius is to run after Bellatrix, yelling, "She killed Sirius! She killed him - I'll kill her!" and then trying casting an Unforgivable on her. Harry, whose first reaction to Dumbledore's death is not to help out with the Order's battle but to actively pursue Snape (who is fleeing anyway), attempting to cast two Unforgivables (which are parried). Harry, who makes clear at the end of HBP that he won't be kind should he meet up with Snape again. And we are concerned with *Lupin's* desire for revenge? Christina From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Fri Jan 20 05:08:04 2006 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Fri, 20 Jan 2006 05:08:04 -0000 Subject: Remus, Sirius and Harry's desires for revenge WAS: Re: Spies, Lies and self-ful In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146744 > > Pippin, regarding Lupin's and Sirius's plan to kill Peter in the > > Shrieking Shack: > > Lupin was about to betray everything his closest friends believed > > in, everything for which they had fought, suffered and died. It's a > > poor way to honor their sacrifice. > > > Debbie: > > But why does that make Lupin a traitor and Sirius not so? Sirius' > > obsession with killing Peter equally betrays what his closest > > friends believed in. In fact, Sirius *invited* Lupin to join him in > > killing Peter. Is it the Azkaban effect -- Sirius' desire to kill > > is excused because he is reckless and crazed with anger, while Lupin > > is too calm and reflective to be given credit for such feelings? > > Christina: > > Exactly, and you're not even taking into account Harry, who I'd argue > shows the same desire for revenge, willingness to kill and injure > (although he shows a lack of ability the first couple of times he > tries), and betrayal of "everything his closest friends believed in." > Alla: Right, new day started here, so I can post this comment. :-) I just wanted to interject briefly, that I am not concerned with Sirius desire for revenge, Lupin's desire for revenge or Harry's desire for revenge. In fact, I would find it VERY strange if they reacted ANY differently to the abov described situations. Now, first of all I actually want to thank Debbie for pointing out that Remus' feelings on the subject of dear Peter could be just intense as Sirius' were. My parting of the ways with any possibility of ESE!Lupin ended with Sirius death and never came back, BUT I actually never considered that Remus might be just in as much shock as Sirius was. Yes, I excuse any recklessness and anger Sirius may have felt by the "Azkaban factor" Reliving your worst memories for twelve years does not do person's psyche any good IMO and I think that Potters' murders and Peter's betrayal was right there on the top of the list of Sirius worst memories. Going back to Remus, even though I saw nothing strange in his desire to kill Peter, I also thought that he should have been able to deal at least a little bit better than Sirius was, since Remus was NOT in prison. But the way Remus talks to Sirius also shows IMO person in shock and maybe he was never able to properly deal with what happened with Potters either. He after all IMO had nobody to help him deal with his grief and pain - no friends, no possibility of making new friends , since he had no paying jobs, etc. And here Wormtail shows up and resurrects from his supposed death. Talk about your world being REALLY turned upside down. Thank you, Debbie again. And of course I am not concerned at all with Harry's desire for revenge. All of his running out and trying to cast Unforgivables happens right AFTER he witnessed murders of the two adults dearest to him, so I would question his mental health if he were to react any other way, except go and get the killer. As I wrote yesterday, Harry's attempts to cast Unforgivables should concern me, but for some reason it does not. If Harry would have started casting Unforgivables on Sirius' killer or Dumbledore' killer when time passed, THAT I would be concerned with. But we saw in the Shack that Harry IS able to keep his cool when he asseses situation that happened long time ago. So, again I am pretty confident that when Harry meets Snape next time he won't be throwing unforgivables on dear Severus. Some very bad words though - I would love to read about. And most importantly JKR seems strangely unconcerned with Harry's failed Crucios and seems IMO much more concerned with the curses Harry tries from Prince's book, but in that instance I hope Harry learned his lesson well. Right, so to make a long story short, I see no cause for concern either in Remus and Sirius desire to kill Wormtail or even more in Harry's desire to hurt Bella and Snape. Harry does NOT have a benefit of time to work through his feelings yet, when he goes after the killers. What Remus and Sirius wanted to do of course should not have happened, and it did not, but the desire for revenge was IMO perfectly understandable and does not make any of them evil. Human - yes. Evil - I doubt it very much. JMO, Alla From juli17 at aol.com Fri Jan 20 06:40:58 2006 From: juli17 at aol.com (juli17ptf) Date: Fri, 20 Jan 2006 06:40:58 -0000 Subject: The Evil of Voldemort; Lily's choice In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146745 Alla wrote: > > The bottom line is I just don't see Voldemort leaving Lily alive > because he did not care enough to kill her. Even if he did not take > her seriously as battle opponent, she could have call for help or > something like that. Leaving a witness to the murder alive, leaving > a mother alive with desire to avenge her sons and husbands deaths? I > strongly doubt it. > > Julie: I see your point, but the bottom line for me is that I just don't see Voldemort *killing* Lily if he had anything to gain from leaving her alive. He could have easily stunned her, or Imperioed her, or whatever. If she had information he felt might be useful, or if he had promised Snape/Peter/Remus/other-poor-sod-fixated-on-Lily he'd spare her life, then why didn't he just incapacitate her and kill Harry? It would cost him nothing, and would provide potential gain (the information she might possess, or the strengthened loyalty of Snape/Peter/Remus/poor sod). It could be as Carol said, that Voldemort offered her a chance to live because she was *unimportant* rather than that she had anything to offer him. If that is the case, I would agree that JKR's statements seem to be misleading, though that probably wasn't her intent (perhaps we're just bad interpreters!). Either that, or Voldemort did have a reason that we still haven't been able to figure out, something that will make complete sense out of what seems to be a hopeless conundrum (to me anyway). Julie From tropicwhale at yahoo.com Fri Jan 20 04:12:29 2006 From: tropicwhale at yahoo.com (tropicwhale) Date: Fri, 20 Jan 2006 04:12:29 -0000 Subject: DEs in Azkaban, Bellatrix (was Re: When will the ministry start kicking butt and taking names?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146746 > > Carol: > > On a related note, I expected a mass escape from Azkaban in > > Book 6. Will we get one in Book 7? > > a_svirn: > It is entirely possible that they are not in a hurry to escape. > Certainly Lucius is better off exactly where he is. Was he even > tried at all by the way? If he wasn't it makes him not a convict > but rather a detainee, so he can probably arrange his own > release when the time is right. (Which is to say, when it's clear > which side is winning). "tropicwhale": My main worry is actually Bellatrix. She is one bad nut and there isn't any squirrels that will take her out. She frightens me more than Voldemort. Voldie at the moment allows his followers to attack people and just tortures them if they fail. Bellatrix will actually just fly off the handle and start killing off innocents just because. That is what scares me. From tropicwhale at yahoo.com Fri Jan 20 04:03:02 2006 From: tropicwhale at yahoo.com (tropicwhale) Date: Fri, 20 Jan 2006 04:03:02 -0000 Subject: When will the ministry start kicking butt and taking names? / Percy In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146747 > maria816200 wrote: > > The MOM doesn't do the hard fight/work, what they do > > is, let the brave and the courageous do the hard and messy > > job and when it's over, MoM will just clean up the litters. > > Carol responds: > Carol, who thinks that the Aurors, or at least Alastor > Moody, deserve credit for hunting down the DEs after Godric's > Hollow, whatever the failings of Crouch Sr. and Fudge may be "tropicwhale": Probably after all the dust settles, The Ministery are nothing but a bunch of ninnies. They are kicking butt and taking names, just the wrong ones, like that stan boy from the Knight bus and Mundungus Fletcher. They are just too afraid of the Deatheaters to do anything proper, although I am still hoping Percy will come to his senses and return to his family. He was in Gryffindor, and there is no one braver that a man who can admit willing that he was wrong. I just hope Percy will come through in the end. From mail_to_jutika at yahoo.com Fri Jan 20 06:53:42 2006 From: mail_to_jutika at yahoo.com (Jutika Gehani) Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2006 22:53:42 -0800 (PST) Subject: Harry the Horcrux Destroyer In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20060120065342.35000.qmail@web80905.mail.scd.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 146748 Nick wrote: > > Rounding up and destroying the horcruxes, we must assume, is > similar in that respect. It has to be a job for which Harry's > unique characteristics (parseltounge, abilitiy to love, > ability to read Voldemort's mind, etc.) are uniquely suited. > Therefore Harry will not need to know how to destroy a horcrux > or how to prevent the curse from enveloping him, because one > or more of his unusual/hidden powers will take care of that > for him. Nick, I totally agree with you that Harry has certain qualities (like ability to love), that could help him fight LV. But you are forgetting the fact that in HBP, it was DD who guessed that one of the Horcruxes was in the cave. And further, it was DD who discovered the hidden entrance in the cave and the fact that you had to sacrifice blood to get through. Harry on the other hand had absolutely no idea. So how do you expect him to find the other horcruxes without DD? Frankly, it seems to be a very daunting task. Jutika. From c.john at imperial.ac.uk Fri Jan 20 08:32:45 2006 From: c.john at imperial.ac.uk (esmith222002) Date: Fri, 20 Jan 2006 08:32:45 -0000 Subject: The Evil of Voldemort; Lily's choice In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146749 > It could be as Carol said, that Voldemort offered her a chance to live > because she was *unimportant* rather than that she had anything to > offer him. If that is the case, I would agree that JKR's statements > seem to be misleading, though that probably wasn't her intent (perhaps > we're just bad interpreters!). Either that, or Voldemort did have a > reason that we still haven't been able to figure out, something that > will make complete sense out of what seems to be a hopeless conundrum > (to me anyway). > > Julie > The only logical answer that I have ever come up with is that setting up a Horcrux takes some prepreparation. Voldemort had killed James, and was about to acheive his goal - the creation of the seventh Horcrux and the removal of the prophesised child. It is possible that he dismissed Lily at this point and prepared to use Harry to make his Horcrux. His next murder HAD to be Harry! Instead, Lily somehow got in the way and ruined the plan. Voldemort is left at Godric's hollow with a split soul and Harry still alive. Presumably Voldemort would have to do something with the newly created soul piece i.e. create a new Horcrux and then move onto Harry. Questions: If this is the case, would he still attempt to create another Horcrux with Harry's death? Since 7 is the most powerful magical number, would trying to create an eight piece soul actually be impossible? If it is impossible, what would happen to the wizard/witch who tried to split their soul a seventh time? Would there be no remaining soul left in their physical body? Brothergib From hubbada at unisa.ac.za Fri Jan 20 09:48:27 2006 From: hubbada at unisa.ac.za (deborahhbbrd) Date: Fri, 20 Jan 2006 09:48:27 -0000 Subject: Draco's admiration for Krum (replying to lots of posts!) Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146750 There is speculation that Draco would have felt admiration for Krum as an international sportsman in a field Draco himself enjoys and is good at, and also because Krum attends a school which teaches the Dark Arts; as we know, this appealed to him. And that is all fair enough, but it can't last through to the end of GoF, for the excellent reason that dear old Viktor voluntarily partnered a Muggleborn girl to the Yule Ball ... and not just any Muggleborn girl either! If he became disillusioned with Krum, it must have been then and not later. Deborah From ceridwennight at hotmail.com Fri Jan 20 11:30:00 2006 From: ceridwennight at hotmail.com (Ceridwen) Date: Fri, 20 Jan 2006 11:30:00 -0000 Subject: The Evil of Voldemort; Lily's choice In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146751 Brothergib: > Since 7 is the most powerful magical number, would trying to create an > eight piece soul actually be impossible? > If it is impossible, what would happen to the wizard/witch who tried to > split their soul a seventh time? > Would there be no remaining soul left in their physical body? Ceridwen: I don't think it's impossible to make eight horcruxes, any more than it is impossible to make two. Tom Riddle fixed on seven because he learned that it's a powerful number. Not because it was the best number for the job, or the maximum possible. Until Voldemort, from what I gather, no one else had tried to make more than one horcrux. The fixation on seven seems to be a superstition on LV's/TR's part. A soul is split when murder is committed, at least that's what I got from what Slughorn said. Not just when a horcrux is the intended result. Though I could be reading you wrong and you mean seven pieces being removed. Ceridwen. From rkdas at charter.net Fri Jan 20 11:59:24 2006 From: rkdas at charter.net (susanbones2003) Date: Fri, 20 Jan 2006 11:59:24 -0000 Subject: When will the ministry start kicking butt and taking names? / Percy In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146752 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "tropicwhale" wrote: > "tropicwhale": > Probably after all the dust settles, The Ministery are nothing > but a bunch of ninnies. They are kicking butt and taking names, > just the wrong ones, like that stan boy from the Knight bus and > Mundungus Fletcher. They are just too afraid of the Deatheaters > to do anything proper, although I am still hoping Percy will > come to his senses and return to his family. He was in Gryffindor, > and there is no one braver that a man who can admit willing that > he was wrong. I just hope Percy will come through in the end. > Jen D. here: There is also another thing that may be going on. There are likely LV sympathizers in the MOM. After all, Lucius Malfoy was a great friend of Fudge's and you can't get higher than that. We still don't know where everyone stands. I know he's not in the picture any longer, but Bagman had DE connections (nevermind his "trial," remember when the Trio tell him that DE's are terrorizing people at the campsite? What does he say? "Damn them!" Not surprise or shock, but anger at their behavior. Wonderful bit of misdirection on JKR's part...)So the MOM's wrong-headed decisions may be more calculated in some respects than we realize. Jen D From annemehr at yahoo.com Fri Jan 20 14:07:55 2006 From: annemehr at yahoo.com (annemehr) Date: Fri, 20 Jan 2006 14:07:55 -0000 Subject: The GoF Train Scene - and beyond (was:Re: Humanity, Kant, Caricatures, and Draco In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146753 > > >>Alla: > > Now, I don't know how Draco felt about Fake!Moody after all, but I > > am hesitant to consider the revelation that his teacher turned out > > to be DE in disguise as huge shake - up of Draco's world. > > > > Betsy Hp: > I'll go out on a limb and guess that Draco had pretty negative > feelings towards Fake!Moody . And, yeah, I doubt it was fun to > realize that the abusive psycho you'd like to have fired is actually > on your side. > > Betsy Hp > Annemehr: I'm pulling for Draco, and I have been for pretty much the whole series. In fact, my main beef against Snape has always been, not how he treated Harry or Neville (obviously, they'll be fine), but how he treated Draco, this boy in his house who's been raised by a Death Eater and whose complete ease in Snape's presence suggested that Snape had never challenged Draco's world view in any way. But, I'm not sure this train scene shows there has been any challenge to Draco's world view either. Assuming Draco knows by then that Fake!Moody was actually a DE, then he knows this was a DE under cover who was *pretending* to help Dumbledore and Harry. It would follow (in Draco's mind) that he could be *pretending* to be against Draco. Draco's ego needing salving for the ferret incident then, I would think it would be no great stretch for him to conclude that he, Draco, had played a necessary part in lending verisimilitude to Fake!Moody's cover. When Draco & co. enter Harry's train compartment at the end of GoF, "[a]ll three of them looked more pleased with themselves, more arrogant and more menacing, than Harry had ever seen them." I agree with you that this shows us a step that Draco's taken toward becoming a DE himself, but I'm not at all sure it was such a struggle at this point. It *is* significant that he had rooted for Cedric and then declares allegiance to the side that murdered him, but unfortunately I cannot see any solid indication about how his feelings evolved between wearing "Support Cedric Diggory" badges and looking so happy about LV's return on the train. The damage to Draco's character is the same either way, but I can't tell how much pain it may have caused him. In other words, Betsy, you may very well be right, but I see less significance in the fact that Draco stood for Cedric at the feast or that Moody turned out to be a DE. But there's no arguing with the fact that HBP changes things. What are Snape and Draco supposed to do now? DDM!Snape is in a quandary. He, by himself, could go back to LV and take what's coming. Ceridwen posted (in msg. #146449) recently that he's no longer useful now that he's no longer at Hogwarts, but I disagree; he's too talented a wizard to be useless, even if his spy "cover" is blown. The trouble is, he has Draco to protect -- Draco who now can have no illusions about what LV's DEs mean to him. Draco's Occlumency skills are apparently pretty good -- but would they stand up against Voldemort? What are Snape's options? Trust Draco with the truth and hope they can both succeed at fooling LV (or that Draco would even agree to it)? Get Draco securely hidden and bluff about it to LV? Just turning him over to LV at this point will result in Draco becoming murderer or murdered -- very tragic collateral damage, just because of whose son he happened to be. Annemehr From annemehr at yahoo.com Fri Jan 20 14:26:41 2006 From: annemehr at yahoo.com (annemehr) Date: Fri, 20 Jan 2006 14:26:41 -0000 Subject: When will the ministry start kicking butt and taking names? / Percy In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146754 > > "tropicwhale": > > Probably after all the dust settles, The Ministery are nothing > > but a bunch of ninnies. > > > Jen D. here: > There is also another thing that may be going on. There are likely LV > sympathizers in the MOM. After all, Lucius Malfoy was a great friend > of Fudge's and you can't get higher than that. We still don't know > where everyone stands. I know he's not in the picture any longer, but > Bagman had DE connections (nevermind his "trial," remember when the > Trio tell him that DE's are terrorizing people at the campsite? What > does he say? "Damn them!" Not surprise or shock, but anger at their > behavior. Wonderful bit of misdirection on JKR's part...)So the MOM's > wrong-headed decisions may be more calculated in some respects than we > realize. > Jen D Annemehr: Oh! Nice catch about Bagman's reaction to the riot; I'd never thought of it that way before! Not that I accepted his innocent demeanor at his trial hook, line and sinker, or anything... I agree with you about the Ministry; it must be a microcosm of the WW, really -- people with all kinds of motives and alliegiances. The trouble is, unfortunately, I don't think we can guess many, can we? I think we can eliminate any more Unspeakables, since it took Rookwood escaping from Azkaban for LV to find out how the protections for the prophecy orbs worked. We could search OoP for clues, but how could we tell the pro-LV people from the merely pro-Fudge people or even just the not-taking-sides-but-still-not-trusted-with-Order-secrets-anyway people? Dawlish, for instance. Maybe he's just an auror doing his job, taking his orders, and not necessarily privy enough to what's behind them to make judgments about whether those orders are right or wrong. Then you'll have your bureaucrats and politicians who are not DEs, but who will be corrupted out of fear or shortsighted pragmatism. There is scope for a lot of intrigue here -- I don't imagine there's room for too much of it in the final book, but I hope we get to see some of it. Annemehr From a_svirn at yahoo.com Fri Jan 20 15:35:24 2006 From: a_svirn at yahoo.com (a_svirn) Date: Fri, 20 Jan 2006 15:35:24 -0000 Subject: The GoF Train Scene (was:Re: Humanity, Kant, Caricatures, and Draco) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146755 > Betsy Hp: > It goes towards my main point, yes. Draco stands for Cedric, but he > doesn't stand for Harry. So it's not peer pressure pulling him to > his feet. There's something there. Something he has to learn to > deny or push down because Cedric was killed by Voldemort. And Draco > is on Voldemort's side, so Cedric must be an enemy. a_svirn: Exactly. And that's goes towards my point. If Draco is capable of discarding people he *stands for* this casually he *must* be rotten. Not that I believe that he ever *stood for* Cedric. He exploited his popularity because it was expedient to do so at the time. And it was a very good plan, actually. Probably his only success until HBP. But that's about all his "admiration" amounted to. > > >>a_svirn: > > I am really curious how you've worked out that one. How do you > > even know that Draco is capable of compassion? > > Betsy Hp: > Draco loves his parents. (See HBP) And since the "Draco is evil" > arguments have made up facts I really don't think I'm stretching > things to see something good in him . I've never seen Draco as > an entirely bad child. a_svirn: So what if he did? The reverse is also true ? his parents love Draco. Does that make Lucius any less of a Death Eater? Or Narcissa any less ruthless? Besides, even if he is not "entirely bad" he is not generally known for his compassion either. I still don't see how you managed to discern any even in the shut down, boxed off and bottled up form. > > >>Alla: Draco IMO would cheer for anybody if that means that > > the person will beat Harry. > > Betsy Hp: > Ooh... *Anybody*? Like, say Hermione? No, I'm pretty sure that if > Draco found something obviously wrong with Cedric (muggleborn, blood- > traitor, etc.) he'd have bagged Cedric completely and gone whole hog > for Krum. But Cedric is a pureblood son (or pure enough, anyway) of > a Ministry wizard who wasn't an Order member or hugely known > Dumbledore supporter. The entire point of Cedric is that he's an > inoffensive character. There's nothing there to dislike. a_svirn: I completely agree with this assessment. There is a mile-wide gap between "noting to dislike" and "stands for" though. > Betsy Hp: > I'll go out on a limb and guess that Draco had pretty negative > feelings towards Fake!Moody . And, yeah, I doubt it was fun to > realize that the abusive psycho you'd like to have fired is actually > on your side. a_svirn: I don't think Draco was much affected by this revelation. The exposure of Barty Crouch Jr. couldn't have muddled Draco's loyalties for the simple reason that he owed Crouch none. It's only Voldmort who is supposed to be above reproach. His minions have always been jealous of each other and competed for his favours. (Draco follows the tradition when he accuses Snape in attempting to steal his "glory".) From c.john at imperial.ac.uk Fri Jan 20 16:07:03 2006 From: c.john at imperial.ac.uk (esmith222002) Date: Fri, 20 Jan 2006 16:07:03 -0000 Subject: The Evil of Voldemort; Lily's choice In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146756 > A soul is split when murder is committed, at least that's what I got > from what Slughorn said. Not just when a horcrux is the intended > result. Though I could be reading you wrong and you mean seven pieces being removed. > > Ceridwen. > My point was that there may be the possibility that a wizard who wants to seperate a soul piece needs to perform some form of magic before the murder that allows this to happen. Therefore, Voldemort may have prepared to split his soul on entering Harry's bedroom, and killing Lily caused his soul to split again. To then use Harry's death as a Horcrux, he would have to split his soul again. I think there must be a limit to how many times you can split your soul, so why not seven! And at that point, what was more important to Voldemort (1) to create a seven piece soul or (2) to use Harry's death to create a Horcrux. I like the thought that Voldemort's greed in making Horcruxes might have precipitated the events at Godric's Hollow! Brothergib From dossett at lds.net Fri Jan 20 16:53:33 2006 From: dossett at lds.net (rtbthw_mom) Date: Fri, 20 Jan 2006 16:53:33 -0000 Subject: The Wedding (was: Mrs. Figg ) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146757 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Jen Reese" wrote: > > Steve/bboyminn: > > I can't imagine Harry thinking he has to stay at the Dursley's > > until he turns 17. He simply has to return long enough to re- > > enforce the protective enchantment at the Dursley. I still say 2 > > weeks a best. > > Jen: I think you're right. Dumbledore requested that the Dursleys > allow Harry to return 'once more, to this house, before his > seventeenth birthday, which will ensure that the protection > continues until that time.' (Chap. 3) Harry heard that comment and > probably understands he doesn't have to stay until his birthday. > > Speculatively I think Harry might be held up by Petunia. Petunia > should be glad to see the back of Harry and be done with the whole > mess, but since she knows more about the WW than she's letting on, > she may also know Voldemort is not a rational person who will leave > them alone just because Harry is gone. If her family received > protection in return for keeping Harry, or if she fears Voldemort > might come looking for Harry once his protection ends, I could see > her crumbling and finally revealing whatever information she's been > hiding. Like letting Harry read Dumbledore's letter(s) and possibly > giving him information about Lily or some item that belonged to her. > Personally, I would like to see her beg for Harry's help... Pat here: I have been listening to HBP with my 9-year-old daughter, and had an interesting brain wave: when Harry left number 4 Privet Drive this year, he packed in a hurry. The beginning of Chapter 3 was spent bringing us 'up to speed' by giving us selections of articles from the Daily Prophet about what happened at the Ministry: as a mother, I feel *certain* that Harry didn't spend much (any?) time cleaning up, and even though Petunia isn't cleaning Harry's room when he's there, I'm certain a woman with a cleaning fetish like hers wouldn't leave the room like that until he returns, almost a year later! What do you want to bet, she spends some time *reading* those newspapers?! And, I'll also bet, she'll read until the end of the articles, not just the abbreviated versions we got. This would give her lots of reasons to talk to Harry - especially if Harry's protection at Privet Drive also extends to the Dursleys until he comes of age, which as we know will be ending shortly. I'd be very interested to find out what additional information was in some of those articles that were interrupted. . . I'd also love to see them begging for help - very satisfying, in a karmic sort of way. . . ~Pat From Nanagose at aol.com Fri Jan 20 16:59:25 2006 From: Nanagose at aol.com (spotsgal) Date: Fri, 20 Jan 2006 16:59:25 -0000 Subject: Remus, Sirius and Harry's desires for revenge WAS: Re: Spies, Lies and self-ful In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146758 > > Pippin, > > regarding Lupin's and Sirius's plan to kill Peter in the > > Shrieking Shack: > > Lupin was about to betray everything his closest friends > > believed in, everything for which they had fought, suffered and > > died. It's a poor way to honor their sacrifice. > Alla: > > Right, new day started here, so I can post this comment. :-) > I just wanted to interject briefly, that I am not concerned with > Sirius desire for revenge, Lupin's desire for revenge or Harry's > desire for revenge. > > In fact, I would find it VERY strange if they reacted ANY > differently to the abov described situations. Christina: Well, yeah, that's essentially what I was saying. If we're going to make a big deal out of Lupin's desire for revenge (and assumed willingness to follow through with it), we'd better also take issue with the same qualities in Harry. We obviously don't, so it shouldn't be an issue at all. > Alla: > ...I actually never considered that Remus might be just in as much > shock as Sirius was...But the way Remus talks to Sirius also shows > IMO person in shock and maybe he was never able to properly deal > with what happened with Potters either. Christina: Remus is a bit emotionally repressed to begin with, and the subject of the Potters' death still affects him, if his odd reactions to Harry bringing up the subject are any indication. I do think that he has had social contact since the Potters died. Unless the labelled professor's case was some kind of joke gift from the other Marauders (which would actually be sort of cute), he's had a job or two. However, I agree that he probably hasn't come to terms with or spoken much about what happened, for a few reasons. The first is that I think Remus spent a lot of time in the Muggle world after that Halloween. The second is that he's the type to keep his emotions on the inside in the first place. Third, the Potters' death is an event that is connected to emotions of happiness for most people (it ended Voldemort's reign of terror), so it would be hard for him to find people that could really understand what he was going through. Now, while it has been a long time since the Potters died, Remus is only finding out their true killer *now*. That must have been difficult, considering the fact that Remus must have mourned Peter as a hero for many years. So the element of surprise is surely a factor in Remus's actions, the same way they are in Harry's. Even Sirius, who has known about Peter's betrayal for years (and has probably relived memories of it in Azkaban), is shaking with emotion when the time comes to kill Peter. It's a high-stress situation. > Alla: > And of course I am not concerned at all with Harry's desire for > revenge. All of his running out and trying to cast Unforgivables > happens right AFTER he witnessed murders of the two adults dearest > to him.... Harry does NOT have a benefit of time to work > through his feelings yet, when he goes after the killers. Christina: Well, not exactly. I mean, he finds out that Sirius supposedly betrayed his parents during the wintertime and sees the man at the end of the schoolyear. That's quite a bit of time to sit with the information. If I came face-to-face with a crazed mass murderer who is bigger and stronger than I, I don't care who he killed, my first instinct would be to RUN! So there's an example of Harry acting after time has passed, although, like you said, I don't find it that big of an issue. I don't think Harry is sadistic or cruel (that's why the Crucio's don't work), but he can be a tad impetuous, and that's all that I fault him for in these instances. If he wants to defeat Voldemort, he needs to reign in his anger and learn to reason under pressure with a clear head. > Alla: > What Remus and Sirius wanted to do of course should not > have happened, and it did not, but the desire for revenge was IMO > perfectly understandable and does not make any of them evil. > Human - yes. Evil - I doubt it very much. Christina: Exactly. Not to mention the fact that supposed "revenge" can be seen as justice, and probably is seen that way by a few of the characters we're talking about. Peter kills (essentially), so Peter is killed. Bellatrix kills, so Bellatrix is killed. It's still wrong for Harry & Co. to take matters into their own hands, but in a world where the government is corrupt and useless, I don't find it particularly shocking that they want to. Christina From belviso at attglobal.net Fri Jan 20 16:55:30 2006 From: belviso at attglobal.net (sistermagpie) Date: Fri, 20 Jan 2006 16:55:30 -0000 Subject: The GoF Train Scene - and beyond (was:Re: Humanity, Kant, Caricatures, and Draco In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146759 > > > >>Alla: > > > Now, I don't know how Draco felt about Fake!Moody after all, but I > > > am hesitant to consider the revelation that his teacher turned out > > > to be DE in disguise as huge shake - up of Draco's world. > > > > > > > Betsy Hp: > > I'll go out on a limb and guess that Draco had pretty negative > > feelings towards Fake!Moody . And, yeah, I doubt it was fun to > > realize that the abusive psycho you'd like to have fired is actually > > on your side. > Annemehr: > I'm pulling for Draco, and I have been for pretty much the whole > series. In fact, my main beef against Snape has always been, not how > he treated Harry or Neville (obviously, they'll be fine), but how he > treated Draco, this boy in his house who's been raised by a Death > Eater and whose complete ease in Snape's presence suggested that Snape > had never challenged Draco's world view in any way. > > But, I'm not sure this train scene shows there has been any challenge > to Draco's world view either. > Magpie: I think Betsy's argument here may be coming across more strongly than she means it in terms of it sounding like Draco is very conscious of things that he probably isn't. I'm not going to speak for Betsy here, but I do recognize some important canonical ideas in what she's saying. The thing with Draco is that he's a supporting character but he does have a character arc, one that will become important in HBP. It's rather unique amongst the younger characters, the kind of thing he's used for--many people had put him in a different role. So where I agree with Betsy is in looking for the foundations being laid for Draco's crisis in Book VI. Now, I don't think that Draco's worldview has been shaken at the end of GoF in terms of his questioning his side. Cedric's death isn't a big catalyst. However, what I think Betsy is saying is that part of Draco's reason for provoking Harry and his friends is his own anxiety over what's happened and there I would agree a bit. Not because Cedric was his best friend or he's genuinely thinking Voldemort is bad now, but because he is trying to process these events in a way that makes him comfortable. When Muggleborns are killed Draco has a built-in reason not to care: they're not supposed to be human. Cedric was a Pureblood kid in his class. He can be unsettled by it. I'm a big fan of Elkins' post-GoF post "Draco the Nutter" where she pointed out that at times when Draco was at his most blatantly sociopathic JKR seemed to always include some small physical sign of internal conflict--in this scene it's the fact that his smirk is "quivering." (With the scene in CoS when he's saying similar things about who will be next he seems downright febrile.) Again, it's not that Draco is acting or truly sorry. It's that he's not as ready for all this as he claims. We're not in Draco's head, so it's all speculation exactly how he feels. He doesn't refuse to stand for Cedric, nor does he express personal remorse. Death means nothing to him (every book makes that point in some way), and I don't think he's fully aware of what it means to say Diggory was the first. It only becomes real when JKR gives him this whole story in HBP where he's forced to deal with death over and over, finally witnessing his first murder. So while any speculation about just what Draco's reaction was is just speculation I think the sorts of things Betsy is pointing out are important plotwise. GoF *is* a foreshadowing of what's to come. It *is* important that the book in which Voldemort returns includes a DE who attacks Draco. I *do* think that Draco's bravado in the final scene is supposed to seem more confident than it is. Every time Draco's involved in anything Voldemort or DE related it's bad for him--Lucius loses his spot on the Board of Governors with his diary stunt, Barty Crouch smacks him around, Lucius is arrested breaking into the MoM. Draco doesn't react to this by rejecting Voldemort. He clings ever more tightly to the idea that Voldemort is supposed to make this right. He seems to always think that being more like a DE is what will make things better. I think that's what Betsy is describing here, that there's a shade of difference between Draco just being genuinely excited by Voldemort and Draco being instinctively afraid or shaken by Voldemort's doings and responding to it by devoting himself even more to the cause. Interviews aren't canon, but JKR has said Draco has consciously shut down his compassion and repressed the better parts of himself because one must do that to become a Death Eater. It's not that he's really a good person just pretending to be bad, but I think she makes distinctions between bad guys. Barty Crouch seems genuinely sadistic and is genuinely devoted to Voldemort. Tom Riddle is a sociopath who literally feels no connection or empathy for others. Snape is perhaps someone who naturally tends towards violence and cruelty but is trying to control that. Lucius hasn't been totally laid out for us but clearly he is able to murder as well. So with Draco I think the point Betsy is making is not that Draco was best buddies with Cedric and Krum and secretly cried into his pillow over Cedric's death. She's just saying that we shouldn't assume he didn't have to repress any feelings of fear or confusion over Cedric ending up dead and that this could play into the train scene. I think he is able to repress them and postpone any real awakening in GoF. In OotP he has to deal with some different issues connected to his father's involvement with the DEs. It's in HBP, imo, where he's really cracking. But I do think at the end of the series I would not be surprised if we are able to see a shape to his story that includes things like Cedric's death. -m From foxmoth at qnet.com Fri Jan 20 16:58:21 2006 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Fri, 20 Jan 2006 16:58:21 -0000 Subject: Remus, Sirius and Harry's desires for revenge WAS: Re: Spies, Lies and self-ful In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146760 Alla: > Now, first of all I actually want to thank Debbie for pointing out > that Remus' feelings on the subject of dear Peter could be just > intense as Sirius' were. Pippin: So, um, Lupin wanted to kill Peter because he was so *traumatized.* Fans have been telling themselves that for years. Only trouble is, there's no canon. Sirius had forgotten reason, law and morality. He was so obsessed with killing Pettigrew that he cut up a portrait, invaded Gryffindor tower with a knife, and physically attacked two students, breaking Ron's leg and choking Harry. He was far beyond questioning whether his behavior was right or wrong, as was Harry when he went in pursuit of Bella. Are you saying there's something in canon to show that Lupin was *ever* in a similar state of mind? Vengeance-mad, nursing old traumas to a murderous Snapelike rage? On the contrary, Lupin tells us that he has been debating with himself about whether he should tell Dumbledore what he knew about Sirius. Obviously he had a conscience to consult, though he didn't listen to it. In the Shack his is the calmest voice, as if, the narrator notes, Hermione had spotted a problem in an experiment about grindylows. The most excited he gets is "very tense" and that's when he first enters. After Pettigrew is transformed, and Lupin sets eyes on this supposed traitor and murderer, does Lupin display loathing and anger? Not a bit. His voice is "light and casual", then he speaks "more coldly" "evenly" and "grimly." As they're about to kill Peter, Black is shaking, he is described as having "a terrible fury in his face." Not Lupin. "You should have realized," said Lupin quietly, "if Voldemort didn't kill you, we would. Good-bye, Peter." I don't really see Lupin losing his cool here. And who is the 'we' Lupin is referring to, since he must know that the Order, and Sirius himself in better times, are opposed to killing? Why should Peter have expected to be killed? Well, Sirius answered that question for us. It's Voldemort's old supporters that Peter was afraid of, they're the ones who want him dead. Pippin From rkdas at charter.net Fri Jan 20 17:31:35 2006 From: rkdas at charter.net (susanbones2003) Date: Fri, 20 Jan 2006 17:31:35 -0000 Subject: Remus, Sirius and Harry's desires for revenge WAS: Re: Spies, Lies and self-ful In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146761 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "pippin_999" wrote: > > > His voice is "light and casual", then he speaks "more coldly" > "evenly" and "grimly." > > As they're about to kill Peter, Black is shaking, he is described > as having "a terrible fury in his face." Not Lupin. > > "You should have realized," said Lupin quietly, "if Voldemort > didn't kill you, we would. Good-bye, Peter." > > I don't really see Lupin losing his cool here. And who is the 'we' > Lupin is referring to, since he must know that the Order, and Sirius > himself in better times, are opposed to killing? Why should > Peter have expected to be killed? Well, Sirius answered that > question for us. It's Voldemort's old supporters that Peter > was afraid of, they're the ones who want him dead. > > > Pippin Pippin, This is a reverse question but some previous posters seem to think that Lupin can not be the spy because JKR has gone out of her way to portray his problems with sympathy. And that somehow it would betray her stance by indeed making the "messed-up" guy the villain. I am condensing this argument but I think I have the gist of it. Isn't it a condescension on our part if we say that the guy with the "disability" can't be the bad guy? JKR's handiest tool is misdirection and in the paragraphs above you navigate in a chilling way through the reasoning necessary to see that indeed, Lupin is capable of killing. It seems somehow we have to reconcile the Lupin that we want to care for because of all his difficulties with the Lupin you reveal to us by simply reading the text with a clear eye. Jen D. From mandorino222 at yahoo.com Fri Jan 20 17:42:19 2006 From: mandorino222 at yahoo.com (mandorino222) Date: Fri, 20 Jan 2006 17:42:19 -0000 Subject: Harry the Horcrux Destroyer In-Reply-To: <20060120065342.35000.qmail@web80905.mail.scd.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146762 > Jutika Gehani wrote: > It was DD who guessed that one > of the Horcruxes was in the cave. > > And further, it was DD who discovered the hidden entrance in the > cave and the fact that you had to sacrifice blood to get through. > Harry on the other hand had absolutely no idea. > > So how do you expect him to find the other horcruxes without DD? > Frankly, it seems to be a very daunting task. Nick wrote: FINDING THE HORCRUXES Surely the whole point of Dumbledore's "private lessons" was to give Harry the information that he would need to do just that? Harry knows everything that Dumbledore knew about Voldemort's horcruxes and where they might be hiding. Now the detective work begins, and we all know that Harry, Ron, and Hermione are formidable detectives. GETTING PAST ENCHANTMENTS Dumbledore attributes his ability to surpass these obstacles to his knowledge of Voldemort's "style" (HBP 563). Harry, obviously, doesn't know Voldemort's style, but I remain convinced that the characteristics that Harry shares with Voldemort (same wand core, parseltongue, half-blood, mental connection forged by the scar) will serve as passwords to enrty. Voldemort, after all, would have attempted to design the defenses guarding the horcruxes so that only he would be able to penetrate them(HBP 564). I'm guessing, then, that he would have relied on characteristics that he thought were unique to him for protection. Unfortunately for him, he blessed Harry with a number of these unique qualities when he gave him the scar. It seems likely that this will lead to Voldemort's downfall (HBP 510-511). Also, let's not underestimate Harry's ability to negotiate obstacles on the way to a goal. He did, after all, get to the Sorcerer's Stone, save Ginny from the Chamber of Secrets, win the Triwizard Tourament, navigate his way through the Department of Mysteries, and get the memory from Slughorn. Nick From rkdas at charter.net Fri Jan 20 18:55:19 2006 From: rkdas at charter.net (susanbones2003) Date: Fri, 20 Jan 2006 18:55:19 -0000 Subject: The GoF Train Scene - and beyond (was:Re: Humanity, Kant, Caricatures, and Draco In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146763 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "annemehr" wrote: Lots of snipping here: > Assuming Draco knows by then that Fake!Moody was actually a DE, then > he knows this was a DE under cover who was *pretending* to help > Dumbledore and Harry. It would follow (in Draco's mind) that he could > be *pretending* to be against Draco. Draco's ego needing salving for > the ferret incident then, I would think it would be no great stretch > for him to conclude that he, Draco, had played a necessary part in > lending verisimilitude to Fake!Moody's cover. Anne, I am missing something! How can we assume Draco knew about Fake! Moody? It seems from canon that FM(Barty Crouch Jr. actually) wanted LV to deal sternly with DE's that walked free. It doesn't seem that any of the DE's who were free knew of BCJr.s continued existence either. They were certainly afraid of seeing the dark mark at the QWC which suggests they knew that LV wasn't too pleased with them. I don't know that it's safe to assume at least by the end of GOF that all the DE's are on the same side. Tell me what you know that I don't! Jen D > > > Annemehr > From foxmoth at qnet.com Fri Jan 20 19:11:45 2006 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Fri, 20 Jan 2006 19:11:45 -0000 Subject: ESE!Lupin condensed In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146764 I know the threads are getting a bit tangled, so I'll try to summarize a bit. The ESE!Lupin theory states that Lupin will be revealed as a villain in Book Seven. What one might call the grand unified version of the theory is as follows: Lupin was instrumental in the prank, as Snape suspected. After he left Hogwarts, Lupin joined the Order. Needing an alias to hide behind while working undercover with the werewolves, he used the name Wormtail. Lupin found it difficult to gain the werewolves' trust and may have compromised himself in order to get it. In some way, he began feeding information to Voldemort. Order members began to be picked off, one by one. Lupin became more distant from his old friends. Sirius, at least, suspected him of being a spy. Lupin learned of the prophecy. He bargained with Voldemort to save Lily, revealing that Peter was the secret keeper. Peter was captured and forced to give up the secret. Lupin was at Godric's Hollow, possibly disguised as Sirius. After the debacle, he took Voldemort's wand from the scene and hid it. He then pursued Peter, who was also pursued by Sirius. When Sirius confronted Peter, Lupin tried to kill Peter but missed, blowing open the street and unintentionally killing the Muggles. Peter took advantage of the situation and escaped in rat form, leaving his amputated finger and bloodied robes behind him. Lupin made himself believe that Sirius was a Death Eater and it was his curse that must have done the damage. Lupin set up the Lestranges, sending them after the Longbottoms and arranging for them to be caught, unfortunately too late for Frank and Alice. With everyone who could identify him as a double agent disposed of, Lupin went into hiding, and remained there until Voldemort returned with Quirrell. Since Quirrell was under suspicion, it was Lupin who met with Hagrid at the Hogs Head. He also killed the unicorns. Lupin was instrumental in the Diary plot, knowing, as JKR says on her website, that it could have made present day Voldemort stronger. Lupin spotted Peter's picture in the Daily Prophet and took the DADA position. When he saw Sirius at the Quidditch game, he summoned the dementors. When he spotted Peter on the Marauder's Map, he stole wolfsbane potion from Snape's cauldron and drank it before running out to the shack. Once there, he encouraged Sirius to tell his story. Once he was certain that Sirius no longer believed that he, Lupin had been the spy, and that Sirius blamed Peter for the Muggle deaths, he meant to help Sirius kill Peter, but Harry intervened. Lupin then settled for arranging Peter's escape, knowing he would transform as they were enroute from the castle, calling the dementors away from the gates and once again endangering Harry. He then forced Peter to return to Voldemort and cooperate in the rebirthing scheme. It was he, AKA "Wormtail" who killed Cedric. Lupin told Sirius that a record of the prophecy was stored in the DoM, mistakenly believing that Dumbledore would share this information with Harry. Lupin put Podmore under the Imperius curse and made him try to break into the DoM. When Sirius revealed that he thought Harry knew about the prophecy, Lupin had no choice but to kill him. Lupin "ran" Draco in HBP, put Tonks under the Imperius curse to use as a messenger, and arranged for Fenrir and another Death Eater to escape from the castle. -- Well, there you have it. Shorn of its supporting canon, it's not hard to explain. Linking it to the clues is complex, but JKR doesn't have to do that anymore than she had to explain all the hints about Barty Crouch Jr, or H/G. Anvil-sized they are, once you get your mind around the concept. Especially when Sirius asks Lupin to forgive him and Lupin says, "Not at all." If that's not a sentence that can be read two different ways, I'm a hippogriff. And it's not the only one. The other anvil-sized hint is the matter we've been discussing recently, that there are discrepancies between Peter Pettigrew's character and the things he would have had to do to function as the spy. He does not seem to be a talented sneak, so the Potters and Sirius should have noticed that something was wrong. If they didn't notice because he was no longer close to them, then it becomes untenable that Sirius only suspected Lupin because only Lupin and Peter were close enough. Peter does not seem to be a talented wizard except when we're not watching him, ie when he could be someone else. McGonagall says he wasn't in James and Sirius's class, and she knows the difference between a weak wizard and one who only lacks confidence. The animagus spell doesn't take a lot of raw power. Sirius can do it even in Azkaban, with dementors outside his door day and night. I agree that ESE!Lupin would need to tell Voldemort about Peter's life debt, but how do we know he hasn't? Voldemort's suspicions about Peter at the beginning of GoF certainly indicate some concern about Peter's attitude towards to Harry. Not concern enough, certainly, but this is, after all, deep magic, magic at its most impenetrable, exactly the sort of magic that Dumbledore says Voldemort has always discounted. Why Lupin should have turned against Dumbledore, to whom he owed so much, will be resolved in Book Seven, IMO, but I believe it to be because Lupin found his adult life unbearable. He could not endure the social disadvantages of living as a werewolf, yet only among his own kind did he feel normal. I see him as conflicted, agonized by Voldemort's brutality, revolted by Fenrir, but seeing theirs as the only path, knowing they mean to use him against the people he loves but still hoping to get control of the situation without revealing to them what he's become. Pippin From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Fri Jan 20 19:57:07 2006 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Fri, 20 Jan 2006 19:57:07 -0000 Subject: The Evil of Voldemort; Lily's choice In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146765 Brothergib wrote: > My point was that there may be the possibility that a wizard who > wants to seperate a soul piece needs to perform some form of magic > before the murder that allows this to happen. Therefore, Voldemort > may have prepared to split his soul on entering Harry's bedroom, and > killing Lily caused his soul to split again. > > To then use Harry's death as a Horcrux, he would have to split his > soul again. I think there must be a limit to how many times you can > split your soul, so why not seven! > > And at that point, what was more important to Voldemort (1) to create a seven piece soul or (2) to use Harry's death to create a Horcrux. I like the thought that Voldemort's greed in making Horcruxes might have precipitated the events at Godric's Hollow! Carol responds: We're told that two things are required to create a Horcrux--a soul split by murder and a spell. There's no indication that the murder has to be performed with the creation of a Horcrux in mind. As far as I can tell, Tom Riddle murdered his father and grandparents for revenge. He didn't know at that time about the ring, which he later made into a Horcrux. He found Morfin Gaunt and pinned the murder on him (planted the memory of commiting it in Morfin's mind) after commiting the murder. At that time he also took the ring, which he still didn't know how to make a Horcrux. (He had also already planted a memory of himself in the diary with the intention of using it to control the basilisk. It wasn't a Horcrux yet, either.) I think that as long as the soul has been split by murder, and "loose" soul piece can be used to create the Horcrux. DD speculates that LV preferred to use significant murders, but how LV could tell the soul piece created by his father's death from the two created at the same time by his grandparents' deaths, I can't guess. IMO, he couldn't. Which brings up another point. Although LV would only need six murders to create six Horcruxes (not seven--the seventh soul piece, which BTW is still fragmented or torn, remains in his body), he has committed more than seven murders by the time of Godric's Hollow. I count Moaning Myrtle's death as a murder: the basilisk is only his instrument, just as the wand is his instrument for the other murders. Tom had every intention of using the basilisk to kill Muggleborns; that's why he called it out of the Chamber. He may even have followed Myrtle to the girls' restroom with that purpose in mind. (I think he used her murder, significant because it was his first, to convert the diary into a Horcrux. It was unprotected by curses, however, because it had to be interactive.) Then we have the three Riddle murders, one of which must have been used for the ring Horcrux. He would still have two usable soul pieces at that point. Then he killed Hepzibah Smith, his fifth murder, and created either the cup or the locket Horcrux from it. I'm guessing that it was the cup since it was connected with her and Hufflepuff. He could then have used, say, his grandfather's murder to create the locket Horcrux. (There's a family connection, even though it's the wrong side of the family.) He still had one soul piece left over, which we can speculate that he used for the unknown Ravenclaw Horcrux. We know that the murders didn't stop there. Voldemort personally killed one the original Order members (Dorcas Meadows, IIRC). Why did he kill her, and was she sufficiently important to use to create a Horcrux? We don't know, but his soul was split again either way. At that point if not sooner (are the Inferi the corpses of people he killed personally?), he had killed enough people to create all six Horcruxes, even if he hadn't used all the murders. Then Voldemort killed James Potter, not, IMO, to use his murder to create a Horcrux, but because he put up a fight and LV wanted to kill Potter's baby son. Then he killed Lily because she wouldn't stand aside. That makes eight people killed personally, more than he needs for Horcruxes even if he didn't already have six when he went to Godric's Hollow, *possibly* intending to use Harry's murder (not James's or Lily's) to create a last Horcrux. After his return, even before he regains his body, he's still killing people: Bertha Jorkins and Frank Bryce, neither of them important enough to use for a Horcrux. (If he creates his last Horcrux, Nagini, at his point, it would be using James's or Lily's murder--assuming that he can distinguish among the soul pieces.) That's eight murders, not counting the Inferi (or Cedric, killed with LV's wand and on his orders but not by his hand). And now there's Madam Bones, again killed by Voldemort himself. So the soul piece remaining in Voldemort is still fragmented, in at least four pieces (three for each "spare" murder plus what's left of the original soul). I'm guessing that the soul is infinite and can be fragmented an infinite number of times. It's not like a pie that can be sliced in haf, then quarters, then eighths, then sixteenths, with the pieces becoming smaller each time. (Nor do I think, as some people have suggested, that they become weaker or more wicked each time; a soul fragment is a soul fragment, and its sole purpose (no pun intended) is to keep Voldemort tied to earthly life, to keep the soul bit(s) in his body from passing beyond the Veil.) To return to your post, I think that the events at Godric's Hollow were precipitated, not by greed for another Horcrux (he considered himself sufficiently protected or he would never have gone there) but by the desire to thwart the Prophecy. If he destroyed the only One who could vanquish him, nothing else would matter, not even the number of Horcruxes he had made and hidden. Nothing and no one could destroy him. He miscalculated, of course, but not because of a desire to create another Horcrux. I also see no evidence that magic is required before a murder to create a Horcrux. You commit the murder, which splits your soul. Then you remove the soul fragment and encase it in an object (or magical creature like Nagini). Possibly a soul bit can be lifted out like a thought from Dumbledore's or Snape's head, but I imagine the process is more intricate, requiring a spell. Whether the same spell also enables you to encase the soul bit in a container, I don't know. IMO, it probably requires an elaborate ritual like the one required to resurrect Voldie's body, though perhaps without a potion. At any rate, the magic seems to occur *after* the murder, not before. (How could Voldie have cast a spell on the cup or the locket before killing Hepzibah Smith if he had to kill her to get them?) Carol, who (incidentally) believes that the wand flick during LV's DADA interview cursed the DADA position and had nothing to do with creating a Horcrux (except frustration at being unable to acquire suitable objects as he might have done as a teacher at Hogwarts) From newbrigid at yahoo.com Fri Jan 20 18:02:56 2006 From: newbrigid at yahoo.com (Lia) Date: Fri, 20 Jan 2006 10:02:56 -0800 (PST) Subject: Remus, Sirius and Harry's desires for revenge--A hope about Lupin In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20060120180256.5945.qmail@web31703.mail.mud.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 146766 susanbones2003 wrote: Pippin, This is a reverse question but some previous posters seem to think that Lupin can not be the spy because JKR has gone out of her way to portray his problems with sympathy. And that somehow it would betray her stance by indeed making the "messed-up" guy the villain. I am condensing this argument but I think I have the gist of it. Isn't it a condescension on our part if we say that the guy with the "disability" can't be the bad guy? JKR's handiest tool is misdirection and in the paragraphs above you navigate in a chilling way through the reasoning necessary to see that indeed, Lupin is capable of killing. It seems somehow we have to reconcile the Lupin that we want to care for because of all his difficulties with the Lupin you reveal to us by simply reading the text with a clear eye. Jen D. Lia says: I haven't joined in the Lupin debate at all. I do have just one little thought on the topic, though. I hope to God that Lupin is not, in fact, evil and/or a supporter of Voldemort. First of all, it would break my heart if he were; I like him tremendously as a character. Aside from that, though, and more importantly: if he were, then that would give credence to all the twisted philosophies and ideas of the likes of Dolores Umbridge, various and sundry Death Eaters, and Voldemort himself. True, Greyback is awful, and lives up to stereotype...but there's bound to be a bad apple in every bunch, of course. JKR, by setting up "half-breed" or "tainted" characters that go AGAINST the alleged grain of their natures--e.g. Lupin, Hagrid & Madame Maxime, Firenze, etc.--shows that true savagery lies in having cold prejudice and (oft-unfounded) hatred. Hence, therefore, ergo, I fervently wish that the sympathy I feel for Lupin, brought on in part by how JKR has portrayed his problems, is well-founded. To me, it might mean that the truly bad guys are right otherwise. Lia, who can't bring herself to believe in an ESE! Lupin From maria8162001 at yahoo.com Fri Jan 20 18:12:27 2006 From: maria8162001 at yahoo.com (Maria Vaerewijck) Date: Fri, 20 Jan 2006 10:12:27 -0800 (PST) Subject: When will the ministry start kicking butt and taking names? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20060120181228.78764.qmail@web53204.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 146767 Carol responds: Carol, who thinks that the Aurors, or at least Alastor Moody, deserve credit for hunting down the DEs after Godric's Hollow, whatever the failings of Crouch Sr. and Fudge may be maria8162001: Sorry, I forgot about Alastor Moody, but he's different, aside from working in the MoM, he's also a member of the OOP , both in VW1 and now. Moody does deserve a lot of credit, but who else from the MoM that is not a member of the OOP that do or can do their job properly when comes to catching death eaters. We still have to see about Gawain(?) the new head of the aurors(?) or something like that. From rkdas at charter.net Fri Jan 20 20:37:13 2006 From: rkdas at charter.net (susanbones2003) Date: Fri, 20 Jan 2006 20:37:13 -0000 Subject: Remus, Sirius and Harry's desires for revenge--A hope about Lupin In-Reply-To: <20060120180256.5945.qmail@web31703.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146768 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Lia wrote: > > > > Hence, therefore, ergo, I fervently wish that the sympathy I feel for Lupin, brought on in part by how JKR has portrayed his problems, is well-founded. To me, it might mean that the truly bad guys are right otherwise. > > Lia, who can't bring herself to believe in an ESE! Lupin Lia, This may not help much, but Pippin's condensation post, (#146764) a tour-de-force of the Reader's Digest History of Lupin(!) does touch briefly on a point, near the end that helped me. Perhaps Lupin never meant to let things get this out of hand. Perhaps he is truly conflicted, not merrily rolling along as a DE or werewolf sympathizer but finding himself in compromising situations that demand difficult and unpleasant measures. This doesn't mean he isn't on the wrong side, but perhaps there are degrees and in those degrees, the real tragedy. Just a thought... Jen D. > From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Fri Jan 20 20:53:50 2006 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Fri, 20 Jan 2006 20:53:50 -0000 Subject: The GoF Train Scene - and beyond (was:Re: Humanity, Kant, Caricatures, and Draco In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146769 Jen D wrote: > I am missing something! How can we assume Draco knew about Fake! > Moody? It seems from canon that FM(Barty Crouch Jr. actually) wanted > LV to deal sternly with DE's that walked free. It doesn't seem that > any of the DE's who were free knew of BCJr.s continued existence > either. They were certainly afraid of seeing the dark mark at the > QWC which suggests they knew that LV wasn't too pleased with them. I > don't know that it's safe to assume at least by the end of GOF that > all the DE's are on the same side. Tell me what you know that I > don't! Carol responds: I asked the same question earlier and didn't receive a satisfactory answer. Dean Thomas in OoP refers to Fake!Moody as a "maniac" and Umbridge somehow knows (from old lesson plans??) that he demonstrated Unforgiveable curses and even used them on the students, but there's no indication that either of them knows his real identity or that he was a Death Eater. No announcement is made that "Moody" has had his soul sucked out by a Dementor. He simply disappears from view; there's no DADA teacher after the Third Task, but the real Moody shows up at the end-of-term banquet. The students apparently have no idea that Fake!Moody put Harry's name in the Goblet of Fire which he later turned into a portkey as part of a plot to kidnap and kill Harry. If they knew that, perhaps they'd believe that Voldemort was back. But the preliminary DA meeting in the Hog's Head reveals that they know nothing, or almost nothing, about what Harry has gone through in GoF or any other books. No one outside the Order even seems to know that Barty Jr. was alive, including the Death Eaters in the graveyard, who hear him referred to only as "my loyal servant at Hogwarts." It's possible that Snape, who was ordered by DD to return to Voldemort that same night, told Voldemort what happened to Barty Jr. but that seems unlikely as he had a hand in Barty's undoing. And I doubt that LV would announce Barty's fate to his fellow Death Eaters. I also doubt that it was in the papers since Fudge at this point is covering up all indications that Voldemort is back. Will someone direct me to any evidence that the students knew that Fake!Moody was the Death Eater Barty Crouch Jr.? Granted, Dean calls him a "maniac," but that's not the same as a Death Eater, and Dean in any case is Harry's roommate, likely to know a bit more than most other students, especially those in other houses (like Draco). Even after Harry's expose' in The Quibbler, later republished in the Daily Prophet, I doubt that they knew (or believed) everything. (How could Harry prove that a young DE who "died" in Azkaban polyjuiced himself to pass himself off as a paranoid ex-Auror? And while you're at it, that an escaped pet rat killed Cedric Diggory?) And did anyone see "Moody" Imperioing Krum or stunning Fleur? We certainly don't hear any more about it except for Krum's discomfort at the end-of-year ceremony, which Harry (not usually so perceptive) notes because he knows the whole story. Does anyone else (aside from Dumbledore, Snape, and McGonagall) know what happened? And if anyone saw Krum Crucio Cedric, why wasn't Krum arrested? (I'm glad he wasn't, but that's beside the point.) I find it hard to believe that the whole school, along with parents, judges and other guests, would spend an hour gazing at a maze in which they could see nothing. Surely they at least saw the light from the wands, the wand sparks sent up for the Patrollers, and the jets of light from the Stunning spells. Carol, unable to confine herself to a single topic as always! From annemehr at yahoo.com Fri Jan 20 21:09:02 2006 From: annemehr at yahoo.com (annemehr) Date: Fri, 20 Jan 2006 21:09:02 -0000 Subject: The GoF Train Scene - and beyond (was:Re: Humanity, Kant, Caricatures, and Draco In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146770 Annemehr: > > Assuming Draco knows by then that Fake!Moody was actually a DE, > Jen D: > I am missing something! How can we assume Draco knew about Fake! > Moody? It seems from canon that FM(Barty Crouch Jr. actually) wanted > LV to deal sternly with DE's that walked free. It doesn't seem that > any of the DE's who were free knew of BCJr.s continued existence > either. Annemehr: Oops -- I didn't mean to imply it was a safe assumption! :D There was discussion (inconclusive, but suggestive) of whether Draco might know that he was a DE, upthread, beginning with post #146640. I think it's quite possible that Draco did know by the time he got on the Hogwarts Express. I was just considering what might have gone through Draco's mind if he did know. I don't think Draco could have known that Barty Jr. hated DEs who walked free, though, so if Draco knew he was a DE, he'd most likely think of him as an ally. Magpie: > I think Betsy's argument here may be coming across more strongly > than she means it in terms of it sounding like Draco is very > conscious of things that he probably isn't. > So with Draco I think the point Betsy is making is not that Draco > was best buddies with Cedric and Krum and secretly cried into his > pillow over Cedric's death. She's just saying that we shouldn't > assume he didn't have to repress any feelings of fear or confusion > over Cedric ending up dead and that this could play into the train > scene. I think he is able to repress them and postpone any real > awakening in GoF. In OotP he has to deal with some different issues > connected to his father's involvement with the DEs. It's in HBP, > imo, where he's really cracking. But I do think at the end of the > series I would not be surprised if we are able to see a shape to his > story that includes things like Cedric's death. Annemehr: Ah, okay. If that's the case then I agree completely. *checks upthread again* Betsy said in msg. #146633: > The end of GoF is the first time Draco is faced with what his > parents' politics *really* means. It must have been a huge shock. > One I think he did his best to ignore, until HBP made it impossible > to do so anymore. In some ways, I think Draco's journey is more > interesting than Harry's. Annemehr again: I just took "huge shock" to imply some consciousness of his feelings, but of course anyone (especially a teenager) can have an overload of strong, conflicting feelings without necessarily being able to identify them, especially when one is squelching some of them. Yes, I am thoroughly interested in many of the characters' journeys: Seamus's, Susan Bones's, Marietta's, Percy's. I wish JKR had found a way to get inside a few more heads for a few more pertinent details. I don't know how, but I really hope we'll at least get some real clues as to what goes on behind Draco's eyes. Something just struck me when I reread this line from the same post of Betsy's, referring to the hexing on the train: > And Harry and friends come through like aces and reassure > Draco that yes, the enemy are dishonorable and brutal. Annemehr: In HBP, the shoe is on the other foot; Harry invades Draco's compartment and gets hexed and left there, immobile and oozing. Harry's reaction, from the beginning of Chapter Eight: "Harry had never hated Malfoy more than as he lay there, like an absurd turtle on its back, blood dripping sickeningly into his open mouth. What a stupid situation to have landed himself in..." Not much reflection or self-evaluation there, but he did at least partly blame himself. Granted, it's not much, but it could be a start. Both boys are going to have to learn to take a second, more clear-eyed look at people they have always condidered enemies. Annemehr From tropicwhale at yahoo.com Fri Jan 20 16:16:31 2006 From: tropicwhale at yahoo.com (Kristin Hessenauer) Date: Fri, 20 Jan 2006 08:16:31 -0800 (PST) Subject: Draco (Re: The GoF Train Scene (was:Re: Humanity, Kant, Caricatures, and Draco)) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20060120161631.31561.qmail@web33204.mail.mud.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 146771 > > Betsy Hp: > > I really don't think I'm stretching things to see > > something good in him . I've never seen Draco as an > > entirely bad child. > > a_svirn: > Besides, even if he is not "entirely bad" he is not > generally known for his compassion either. I still don't see > how you managed to discern any even in the shut down, boxed > off and bottled up form. tropicwhale: Personally I think Draco was brainwashed, there is good potential in him, it is just that he is weak. He is too weak to change and too brainwashed to ever want to change. Annemehr: > I'm pulling for Draco, and I have been for pretty much the > whole series. In fact, my main beef against Snape has always > been, how he treated Draco, this boy in his house who's > been raised by a Death Eater and whose complete ease in Snape's > presence suggested that Snape had never challenged Draco's > world view in any way. > > > What are Snape's options? Trust Draco with the truth and hope > they can both succeed at fooling LV (or that Draco would even > agree to it)? Get Draco securely hidden and bluff about it to > LV? Just turning him over to LV at this point will result in > Draco becoming murderer or murdered -- very tragic collateral > damage, just because of whose son he happened to be. tropicwhale: I still say that Draco was just too weak to have an opinion on his own. There is a term in psychology (that I cannot find at the moment) during identity vs role confusion in Erikson's stages where he's failed as refusing to develop as his own person. I agree that someone needs to challenage his worldview otherwise he's just going to remain Voldemort's and Lucius' playtoy for the rest of his life, which probably is going to be short now that he failed to kill Dumbledore, Voldemort was obviously looking for an excuse to off the Malfoys, they all failed at the jobs they were given, like keeping Voldie's diary safe in book two, gaining the prophecy in book 5 and killing Dumbledore in book 6. Draco was just caught in the middle of his Dark Lord and his parents. From fuzz876i at yahoo.com Fri Jan 20 20:35:40 2006 From: fuzz876i at yahoo.com (fuzz876i) Date: Fri, 20 Jan 2006 20:35:40 -0000 Subject: When will the ministry start kicking butt and taking names? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146772 > tropicwhale wrote: > Probably after all the dust settles, The Ministry are nothing > but a bunch of ninnies. They are kicking butt and taking names, > just the wrong ones, like that Stan boy from the Knight bus and > Mundungus Fletcher. They are just too afraid of the Deatheaters > to do anything proper, fuzz876i: I agree with you in that the ministry is going about the arrest of death eaters. The fact that Stan Shunpike would say and do anything for attention leads me to believe they made a big mistake with him. They should have arrested the one they know about -- Fenrir Greyback. He has been attacking kids for years. What about the ones that escaped Azkaban prison, why are they not trying to arrest them? In my opinion it would be a show of bad character and a life ending decision to actually arrest real death eaters. Scrimgeour said that it was better to say three arrests than three mistaken arrests and releases. From fuzz876i at yahoo.com Fri Jan 20 20:47:24 2006 From: fuzz876i at yahoo.com (fuzz876i) Date: Fri, 20 Jan 2006 20:47:24 -0000 Subject: The Evil of Voldemort; Lily's choice In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146773 > Andie wrote: > > Maybe Voldy wanted to see if all mothers were the same. > > His mother, in his eyes, selfishly gave up her life and > > left Voldy to the orphanage. LV expected Lily be selfish > > too and to stand aside and save her life. Instead Lily > > did what Merope wouldn't or couldn't, she gave up her life > > so she could protect the life of her son and in doing so > > brought LV down with her. > > Tonks: > I don't think that LV's mother "gave" her life. (JKR said > that when Lily died for Harry, that no one had ever done that > before.) LV's mother just died from the complications of > childbirth. Just because she was a witch doesn't mean > that she could beat death. > > This is, of course, what her son tries to do. No doubt his > mother's death had an impact on him. Probably a "what if" > sort of thing. I am sure that it contributed to his twisted > mentality somehow. But the point here is that Merope didn't > "give" her life, she just died. I agree that the complications of child birth might have killed Merope but she chose, in Dumbledore's mind, to stop using magic after she got Tom Senior to love her with her love potion. After that she completely gave up the use of magic to survive even going as far as selling her family's prize locket. Horace Slughorn used magic to find places to live in his want to be undetected by death eaters, so couldn't Merope? In my opinion she did not want to draw attention to the fact that she was a witch. She chose death over life in that she gave up her abilities to do magic to save her life and in so doing died in childbirth. The case with Lily Potter is that she protected Harry with love that allowed the avada kerdava curse to rebound off young Harry and return once again to its caster. If Merope had shown this love and used her magic to conjour food then maybe, just maybe, we would not have this problem with Lord Voldemort. fuzz876i From tropicwhale at yahoo.com Fri Jan 20 18:06:13 2006 From: tropicwhale at yahoo.com (Kristin Hessenauer) Date: Fri, 20 Jan 2006 10:06:13 -0800 (PST) Subject: Harry the Horcrux Destroyer / 7 Horcruxes (was Re: The Evil of Voldemort; Lily's choice) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20060120180613.35285.qmail@web33210.mail.mud.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 146774 > Jutika Gehani wrote: > So how do you expect him to find the other horcruxes > without DD? Frankly, it seems to be a very daunting task. Nick wrote: > Also, let's not underestimate Harry's ability to > negotiate obstacles on the way to a goal. He did, after all, > get to the Sorcerer's Stone, save Ginny from the Chamber of > Secrets, win the Triwizard Tourament, navigate his way through > the Department of Mysteries, and get the memory from Slughorn. tropicwhale: You could also contribute Harry's ablitities to overcome obstacles as dumb luck and very smart friends (Hermione, Dumbledore). If you read through the books, his friends are the ones who clear the way and he tackles the final task of stopping whatever plan Voldemort concocted this time around. > Brothergib: > > Since 7 is the most powerful magical number, would trying to > > create an eight piece soul actually be impossible? > Ceridwen: > I don't think it's impossible to make eight horcruxes, any more > than it is impossible to make two. Tom Riddle fixed on seven > because he learned that it's a powerful number. Not because it > was the best number for the job, or the maximum possible. Until > Voldemort, from what I gather, no one else had tried to make > more than one horcrux. tropicwhale: Well, seven horcruxes was unheard of before Riddle did it. Remember what Slughorn said in the unaltered memory? From quick_silver71 at yahoo.ca Fri Jan 20 22:33:56 2006 From: quick_silver71 at yahoo.ca (quick_silver71) Date: Fri, 20 Jan 2006 22:33:56 -0000 Subject: Draco (Re: The GoF Train Scene (was:Re: Humanity, Kant, Caricatures, and Draco)) In-Reply-To: <20060120161631.31561.qmail@web33204.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146775 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Kristin Hessenauer wrote: > tropicwhale: > I agree that someone needs to challenage his worldview otherwise > he's just going to remain Voldemort's and Lucius' playtoy for the > rest of his life, which probably is going to be short now that he > failed to kill Dumbledore, Voldemort was obviously looking for an > excuse to off the Malfoys, they all failed at the jobs they were > given, like keeping Voldie's diary safe in book two, gaining the > prophecy in book 5 and killing Dumbledore in book 6. Draco was > just caught in the middle of his Dark Lord and his parents. > I disagree. There seems to be a view in fandom that Draco is somehow in really big trouble with Voldemort and that his life is going to be in danger. Everyone, including Draco's own mother, didn't think that he'd be able to complete his task yet Draco basically did complete it. He got a group of Death Eaters into Hogwarts and managed to get Dumbledore at the mercy of his wand. These are hardly insufficient tasks that Draco completed in the service of the Dark side. Voldemort may have wanted Draco to fail so that he could punish Lucius but instead Draco did something even better...he eliminated Dumbledore (or caused the situation that led to Dumbledore's death). Even the loss of Snape as a spy isn't that big deal...it not like we've really seen or heard Snape do anything for the Dark side (until the situation that Draco brought about forced him to kill Dumbledore). What's more Snape was at Hogwarts to spy on Dumbledore so if Draco had killed Dumbledore Snape would still be useless. I could be completely wrong and Draco could be in huge trouble from Voldemort but IMO there's just as likely a chance that we'll see Voldemort pinning medals on Draco's and Snape's chests in book 7 for a job while done. Quick_Silver From katmac at katmac.cncdsl.com Fri Jan 20 22:46:10 2006 From: katmac at katmac.cncdsl.com (lagattalucianese) Date: Fri, 20 Jan 2006 22:46:10 -0000 Subject: Bellatrix, Dementors, Umbridge, Centaurs (Was: DEs in Azkaban, Bellatrix) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146776 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "tropicwhale" wrote: > > "tropicwhale": > My main worry is actually Bellatrix. She is one bad nut and there > isn't any squirrels that will take her out. She frightens me more > than Voldemort. Voldie at the moment allows his followers to attack > people and just tortures them if they fail. Bellatrix will actually > just fly off the handle and start killing off innocents just > because. That is what scares me. > La Gatta Lucianese: What I'd like to know about Bellatrix, apart from her general loose- gunness, is what she is doing out of Azkaban. We know that she received a life sentence (Gof.30) for the torture of the Longbottoms and general bad behavior, but escaped in January of 1996 (OotP.25), yet she is running around loose the following June, when she has enough gall to participate in the battle in the Department of Mysteries, during an interval when Sirius Black, another escapee, is having to hide out in an unplottable safe house for fear of being run in by the authorities. She is still out and about the following late summer or autumn, when she and Narcissa pay a visit to Snape at Spinner's End (HBP.2). Is MoM really not equipped to take her on, or are they simply too witless and gutless to run her in, or what? A couple of miscellaneous points: (1) AIR, there has been some debate recently about what dementors were doing in Little Whinging in the late summer of 1995 (OotP.1), and whether they were sent by MoM or whether they had gone over to Voldemort by that time. In OotP.32, Umbridge says outright that it was she who sent them, to force Harry to perform underage magic and thus get himself expelled, so that MoM could discredit him and through him Dumbledore: "'*Somebody* had to act,' breathed Umbridge, as her wand came to rest pointing directly at Harry's forehead. 'They were all bleating about silencing you somehow--discrediting you--but I was the one who actually *did* something about it....'" (2) Although we see plenty of centaurs, we never see any female centaurs AIR. Why? There must be some, since the centaurs we do see refer frequently to "foals". Are the females universally pacifist? Do they follow the ancient Amazon custom of living in separate communities and visiting infrequently? Or are centaurs the ultimate male chauvinist horses' asses, who believe that women belong barefoot, pregnant, and in the kitchen? From horridporrid03 at yahoo.com Fri Jan 20 23:01:26 2006 From: horridporrid03 at yahoo.com (horridporrid03) Date: Fri, 20 Jan 2006 23:01:26 -0000 Subject: The GoF Train Scene - and beyond (was:Re: Humanity, Kant, Caricatures, and Draco In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146777 > >>Magpie: > I think Betsy's argument here may be coming across more strongly > than she means it in terms of it sounding like Draco is very > conscious of things that he probably isn't. > Betsy Hp: Yes, thank you Magpie. When I say Draco stood for Cedric, I don't mean he wrapped himself in the Hufflepuff flag and started singing the Order fight song. All that I'm looking for is a tiny bit of positive emotion towards Cedric, a sense that Draco would not have predicted Cedric's death as being Voldemort's opening shot. >> Magpie: > So with Draco I think the point Betsy is making is not that Draco > was best buddies with Cedric and Krum and secretly cried into his > pillow over Cedric's death. She's just saying that we shouldn't > assume he didn't have to repress any feelings of fear or confusion > over Cedric ending up dead and that this could play into the train > scene. I think he is able to repress them and postpone any real > awakening in GoF. In OotP he has to deal with some different > issues connected to his father's involvement with the DEs. It's > in HBP, imo, where he's really cracking. > Betsy Hp: The interesting thing is that a lot of Draco fans (myself included) were hoping for some sort of fall out from this final scene in GoF to occur in OotP. And we had to wait until HBP. I think part of it was that JKR needed the entire Malfoy family to sour on Voldemort before she could put Draco through his awakening (Draco would *never* betray his family). But I think another part may have been the need to have Draco's development not leap frog over Harry's. Draco was in a sort of holding pattern in OotP. He took the power Umbridge offered, but I never got the sense he thought well of her, and he kept it on a school-boy level (taking unfair points, insulting Harry's mom, etc.). Harry, who had realized this was beyond school-boy games by the end of GoF, pretty much left Draco behind. But when HBP hit suddenly Draco was forced to grow-up, and interestingly enough, Harry was the one playing catch-up. > >>Betsy said in msg. #146633: > > The end of GoF is the first time Draco is faced with what his > > parents' politics *really* means. It must have been a huge shock. > > One I think he did his best to ignore, until HBP made it > > impossible to do so anymore. In some ways, I think Draco's > > journey is more interesting than Harry's. > >>Annemehr: > I just took "huge shock" to imply some consciousness of his > feelings, but of course anyone (especially a teenager) can have an > overload of strong, conflicting feelings without necessarily being > able to identify them, especially when one is squelching some of > them. Betsy Hp: And I do think Draco did some serious squelching. I think any hint of conscious doubt would have been met with some major brick walls. And I think Draco marching into the Gryffindor compartment and spitting his defiance right into the lion's eye, as it were, was his best attempt at regaining his balance. (Though I do think some hairline fractures probably remained, or at least, there were some new weak spots in Draco's belief system.) > >>Jen D: > > I am missing something! How can we assume Draco knew about Fake! > > Moody? > > > >>Carol: > I asked the same question earlier and didn't receive a satisfactory > answer. Dean Thomas in OoP refers to Fake!Moody as a "maniac" and > Umbridge somehow knows (from old lesson plans??) that he > demonstrated Unforgiveable curses and even used them on the > students, but there's no indication that either of them knows his > real identity or that he was a Death Eater. > Betsy Hp: For myself, I don't think it's necessary that Draco know Fake!Moody was actually Barty Crouch, Jr., card carrying Death Eater. All Draco needed to know was that Fake!Moody was working against Dumbledore, probably with Voldemort, and was partially responsible for what happened in the maze. I think canon implies pretty heavily that all the students knew that Fake!Moody was a fake by the time of the Leaving Feast. I'm sure they knew that Fudge considered him an enemy and that he'd had his soul sucked by a Dementor. We know how affective the school rumor mill is. We know that Fudge and McGonagall "discussed" Fudge's action in the school hallways where any portrait or ghost could listen in. And we know that Dumbledore wanted the student body as informed as possible. He wouldn't tell Harry's version of the tale (that's Harry's business), but I don't see why he'd squelch the knowledge that Fake!Moody had been a dark agent. Honestly, I think it's strange to assume that the student-body *didn't* realize something was up with Moody. I'm not sure how to piece this in, but I was asked, up-thread, why I thought Draco was capable of compassion, and I said that he loved his parents. I wanted to respond to these responses. > >>Alla: > > Voldemort loved his mother too. Does it make him a compassionate > person? > Betsy Hp: Actually, Voldemort doesn't love his mother. That's a big part of what makes him Voldemort -- his lack of love, or lack of compassion. It's why he thinks he can ask his followers to completely betray and destroy their families. Because he'd do the same in their place. (Voldemort would not risk death to save his mother.) > >>a_svirn: > > The reverse is also true ? his parents love Draco. Does that make > Lucius any less of a Death Eater? Or Narcissa any less ruthless? > Betsy Hp: In a strange way, it does. At least, Narcissa will risk her life and her family's fortune to safe-guard her son. Sure, she's absolutely ruthless about it. But it's a ruthlessness born of compassion. (Ruthlessness is not necessarily an evil trait, nor is it one unique to Death Eaters or their ilk.) If Lucius does love Draco than he'd agree with Narcissa's actions in defying the Dark Lord to protect their son. Which would make him less of a Death Eater than Bellatrix who wishes she has children she can sacrifice to Voldemort, and Barty who eagerly kills his father and makes a mockery of his mother's sacrifice. > >>Magpie: > > The thing with Draco is that he's a supporting character but he > does have a character arc, one that will become important in HBP. > It's rather unique amongst the younger characters, the kind of > thing he's used for--many people had put him in a different role. > Betsy Hp: Now I'm intrigued! What do you see Draco being used for? For myself, part of my interest in Draco is that in order to grow up he needs to reach beyond his parents. (I disagree that he was brainwashed, as Tropicwhale suggests in post #146771. He's just been raised a certain way.) So I think Draco will end up growing further than Harry. Harry just needs to become what his parents and mentors hoped he would be. Draco has to reject his parents plans and create plans of his own. It's like Harry is Tom Sawyer, but Draco is Huckleberry Finn. And I did find Huckleberry the more interesting character. Betsy Hp (who snipped and grabbed and snipped some more, from posts all up and down this thread) From tropicwhale at yahoo.com Fri Jan 20 18:49:56 2006 From: tropicwhale at yahoo.com (Kristin Hessenauer) Date: Fri, 20 Jan 2006 10:49:56 -0800 (PST) Subject: Remus, Sirius and Harry's desires for revenge / ESE!Lupin condensed In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20060120184956.94047.qmail@web33206.mail.mud.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 146778 Pippin: > In the Shack his is the calmest voice, > The most excited he gets is "very tense" and that's when > he first enters. After Pettigrew is transformed, and > Lupin sets eyes on this supposed traitor and murderer, > does Lupin display loathing and anger? Not a bit. > > "You should have realized," said Lupin quietly, "if Voldemort > didn't kill you, we would. Good-bye, Peter." > > I don't really see Lupin losing his cool here. And who is the > 'we' Lupin is referring to, since he must know that the Order, > and Sirius himself in better times, are opposed to killing? > Why should Peter have expected to be killed? Well, Sirius > answered that question for us. It's Voldemort's old supporters > that Peter was afraid of, they're the ones who want him dead. tropicwhale: Yeah, but look at how the Marauders were when they were in school. The world was divided into two bits -- "us" and "not us". Peter went over to the "not us" side and Lupin was probably just as angry as Sirius in the Shrieking Shack, he just had years to perfect control because he is a werewolf. His training kicked in, that's all. He was just as angry at being betrayed by Peter, and Lily and James needed to be avenged. pippin_999 wrote in "ESE!Lupin condensed": > I know the threads are getting a bit tangled, so I'll try to > summarize a bit. The ESE!Lupin theory states that Lupin will > be revealed as a villain in Book Seven. tropicwhale: Lupin can't be a villain, he's too nice. And afraid of his abilities as a werewolf!!! From tropicwhale at yahoo.com Fri Jan 20 17:21:49 2006 From: tropicwhale at yahoo.com (Kristin Hessenauer) Date: Fri, 20 Jan 2006 09:21:49 -0800 (PST) Subject: Harry's protection at the Dursleys' - how long must he stay? (was Re: The Wedding) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20060120172149.89144.qmail@web33202.mail.mud.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 146779 > Steve/bboyminn: > > I can't imagine Harry thinking he has to stay at the Dursleys' > > until he turns 17. He simply has to return long enough to re- > > enforce the protective enchantment at the Dursley. I still say > > 2 weeks at best. > > Jen: > I think you're right. Dumbledore requested that the Dursleys > allow Harry to return 'once more, to this house, before his > seventeenth birthday, which will ensure that the protection > continues until that time.' (Chap. 3) Harry heard that comment > and probably understands he doesn't have to stay until his > birthday. tropicwhale: Reread the books, he never left the Dursleys' before his birthday, July 31, so a month. It said in OotP that OWLs were the 25th(?) more or less. And they line up with the finals for the rest of the school. So summer vacation is about two months long, Harry's birthday is halfway. He is picked up by the Weasleys (book two with a flying car, book four with floo) he runs away (book 3), Dumbledore (book 6), or the advance gaurd (book 5), book one he was with Hagrid and then returned to the Dursleys until the train left. I guess he'll be picked up by Ron and Hermione his 17 birthday to start searching for the horcruxes, after Fleur and Bill's wedding, of course. From mgrantwich at yahoo.com Sat Jan 21 00:54:20 2006 From: mgrantwich at yahoo.com (Magda Grantwich) Date: Fri, 20 Jan 2006 16:54:20 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Locket in Black house In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20060121005420.84741.qmail@web53112.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 146780 --- hamstermap wrote: > I remember in my time of reading the fifth book that they > found a gold locket and not realizing what it was did > something with it. Now assuming that Regulus Black really is > R.A.B. could this locket be the Slytherin locket. I know he is > dead but on the note in HBP the writer > said that he would be long dead before anyone found the fake > locket. I also remember Regulus Black wanting to back out of > the DEs. So I came > up with this little bit and its just something to think about. Good catch, Hamstermap! Welcome to the group. (Interesting name, by the way.) Yes indeed, we've all been speculating about the two - or one? - locket and we're pretty much certain that RAB was Regulus. I think JKR confirmed it or hinted pretty strongly about it some time ago. It would also tie into Harry inheriting 12 Grimmauld Place, Mungungus Fletcher stealing stuff from the house and then being imprisoned at Azkaban, and Harry becoming Kreacher's owner - all things that are stated in HBP and then pretty much dropped from that plotline. What do you think happened to the locket? Was it really thrown out? Or did Kreacher save it? Magda __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com From brahadambal at indiatimes.com Fri Jan 20 08:26:18 2006 From: brahadambal at indiatimes.com (latha279) Date: Fri, 20 Jan 2006 08:26:18 -0000 Subject: Book 1 Questions -- wands In-Reply-To: <00e801c61d4c$37fa7a40$14b2a8c0@rechnerchen> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146781 > Miles: > it's obviously not standard that a wizard gets his own > and new wand when he starts at Hogwarts. > > Two of the main characters of Hogwarts students do not have or > had "own" wands, and we only know of few wand origins at all. > So for me, JKR wants to show us that getting a new wand of his > or her own for an eleven year old kid is not standard in the > wizarding world. I agree. We also see in PoA, that Sirius uses Ron's wand and later Snape's. Snape, whom Sirius hated too much - and still the wand worked for him. It all shows that whatever the wand, it is ultimately the wizard who is handling it that matters. The wizard would actually be directing his magical energy through a thought-process and connect that with the wand and channelize the magical energy. It is like having a tank full of water on the roof and channelizing it on the can with some force onto the car to wash it. Therefore, it makes complete sense to assume that Ollivander's disappearance in HBP is very very relevant as LV may be desperate to get information on Harry's wand AND to get a new one for himself too (if he feels it necessary, that is). To avoid a similar situation to the one that occured in GoF, all LV has to do next time is to break the chord early. Very simple indeed. Don't force the brother wands to fight. But break the connection and cast spells/curses at a different interval than HP .. in that way, the brother wands will never be made to connect. My tuppence. Brady From witherwing at sbcglobal.net Sat Jan 21 01:05:48 2006 From: witherwing at sbcglobal.net (Rebecca Scalf) Date: Sat, 21 Jan 2006 01:05:48 -0000 Subject: Locket at Grimmauld Place Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146782 What if Regulus was able to round up more than one horcrux before he died/ disappeared? It would make Harry's job a bit easier, providied Mundungus didn't pilfer and sell them off. Harry may be the proud owner of more than one horcrux! That house was full of dark objects... Witherwing From bartl at sprynet.com Sat Jan 21 01:40:07 2006 From: bartl at sprynet.com (Bart Lidofsky) Date: Fri, 20 Jan 2006 20:40:07 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: The Evil of Voldemort; Lily's choice In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <43D190F7.1030200@sprynet.com> No: HPFGUIDX 146783 Ceridwen wrote: > The fixation on seven seems to be a superstition on LV's/TR's part. Bart: I assume that he was well-versed in Arithmancy. I've actually done some research into the significance of the number 7; much of it seems to be rather arbitrary, and probably influenced by the 7 bodies in the sky that appear to move in relation to the relatively fixed background of stars (the Sun, the Moon, Mercury, Venus, Mars, Jupiter, Saturn). However, there are a few other significances. If, there is the principle of 1 -> 3 -> 7. You take 1, and use it as a fulcrum between two other things, and you end up with 3. You take 2 of those, and put a fulcrum in between them, and you have 7 (the progression continues to 15, 31, 63, 127, etc.). Note that these are all powers of 2 - 1. Psychological testing shows that the maximum number of items that the human mind can conceive at any given time is 7, which is probably why the number 7 has taken hold so well with people. Bart From stevejjen at earthlink.net Sat Jan 21 02:04:10 2006 From: stevejjen at earthlink.net (Jen Reese) Date: Sat, 21 Jan 2006 02:04:10 -0000 Subject: Harry's protection at the Dursleys' - how long must he stay? In-Reply-To: <20060120172149.89144.qmail@web33202.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146784 > > Jen: > > I think you're right. Dumbledore requested that the Dursleys > > allow Harry to return 'once more, to this house, before his > > seventeenth birthday, which will ensure that the protection > > continues until that time.' (Chap. 3) Harry heard that comment > > and probably understands he doesn't have to stay until his > > birthday. > tropicwhale: > Reread the books, he never left the Dursleys' before his birthday, > July 31, so a month. Jen: What about in HBP when Harry left after a fortnight and celebrated his birthday at the Weasleys? I'm not clear whether your argument is the protection won't work if Harry doesn't stay until after his birthday, or if you are describing what you think will happen for plot purposes in Book 7. I was writing about the protection, whether Harry needs to stay until his birthday for the protection to continue. From what Dumbledore said (quoted above) and the fact Harry left Privet Dr. after two weeks in HBP, it doesn't seem there's a set length of time he must stay for the protection to be activated. The activation trigger seems to be Petunia--will she allow him houseroom one more time? I think she will because there are still plot points to tie up with her and possibly other surprises. tropicwhale: > I guess he'll be picked up by Ron and Hermione his 17 > birthday to start searching for the horcruxes, after Fleur and > Bill's wedding, of course. Jen: Ron said they'll be going with Harry to Privet Dr. That could change, but I'm hoping to see the Dursleys dealing with two extra magical people in the house. They can always stay with Mrs. Figg if Vernon won't allow it! Jen R. From belviso at attglobal.net Sat Jan 21 00:22:07 2006 From: belviso at attglobal.net (Magpie) Date: Fri, 20 Jan 2006 19:22:07 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] The GoF Train Scene - and beyond (was:Re: Humanity, Kant, Caricatures, and Draco References: Message-ID: <007d01c61e20$bbb92e60$c086400c@Spot> No: HPFGUIDX 146785 > >>Magpie: > > The thing with Draco is that he's a supporting character but he > does have a character arc, one that will become important in HBP. > It's rather unique amongst the younger characters, the kind of > thing he's used for--many people had put him in a different role. > Betsy Hp: Now I'm intrigued! What do you see Draco being used for? Magpie: Oh, I just meant that early on Draco was often described as only a schoolyard bully that Harry would grow beyond, whose choices regarding his future weren't important. It seems now that JKR finds the difference between talking the talk and walking the walk significant, and considers a kid's potential fall into real evil a dramatic story. Dumbledore spends most of his last scene overseeing this choice. I don't know where this will go in the next book, but Draco's actual character when and if he actually discovers it seems like it could tip a scale or two. Betsy: Harry just needs to become what his parents and mentors hoped he would be. Draco has to reject his parents plans and create plans of his own. It's like Harry is Tom Sawyer, but Draco is Huckleberry Finn. And I did find Huckleberry the more interesting character. Magpie: That's certainly true. To me it seems like part of the victory against Voldemort would have to be the next generation learning and coming up with a new way. Killing Draco for being a bigot or making sure he's thrown in jail just isn't a victory. I was talking to someone recently about what was going on in the Tower and I realized that it seems to me that Draco is important because he's a potential Dumbledore misfit-those people for whom Dumbledore offered a second chance to change their life. Dumbledore has plenty of straight-out supporters, but I think the misfits are the ones that are potentially the biggest risk and so offer bigger potential reward or ability to change. Snape being the most important, of course. James Potter might have been the greatest guy ever, but Snape's dominating the narrative; he's the one Dumledore's always declaring his trust in. I wouldn't be surprised to see Harry remind Draco of Dumbledore's words in the next book, and for Harry's witnessing that scene to be important. Annemehr: In HBP, the shoe is on the other foot; Harry invades Draco's compartment and gets hexed and left there, immobile and oozing. Harry's reaction, from the beginning of Chapter Eight: "Harry had never hated Malfoy more than as he lay there, like an absurd turtle on its back, blood dripping sickeningly into his open mouth. What a stupid situation to have landed himself in..." Not much reflection or self-evaluation there, but he did at least partly blame himself. Granted, it's not much, but it could be a start. Magpie: Something tells me the same lines were probably running through Malfoy's own mind as he oozed his way home in a luggage rack.:-) tropicwhale: I still say that Draco was just too weak to have an opinion on his own. There is a term in psychology (that I cannot find at the moment) during identity vs role confusion in Erikson's stages where he's failed as refusing to develop as his own person. Magpie: I don't know the psychological term but Sartre's term would probably "Bad Faith." Hmm, where have we heard that term before.:-) HBP seems to be about Draco coming to the point where he has to form his own opinion, facing the fact that he has a choice to make on his own. Someone living under Bad Faith, as I understand it, identifies himself as "one of them" instead of as an individual, and just lives a role. A lot of what Draco is doing in HBP seems connected to attacking exactly this view of himself, though it ends with his choice up in the air. Of course, as Betsy pointed out, Draco's one of the few students who is expected to define himself this way. If you come from a good family it's fine to define yourself in context of them, and to make their values your values without having to question them too much. Sirius is often held up as a character who defined himself, but in fact he really isn't a particularly mature character in his views of himself and others, including his family. It's not surprising, imo, that Draco is basically in limbo at the end of HBP--he knows what he isn't going to do, but what can he do instead? Fanfic, I think, often makes choices purely logical--Draco realizes Voldemort is a crazy and so makes a deal with Dumbledore. But the real character is far more messy and emotional, less political etc. And rather than Harry having to deal with a Draco now on his side, Harry just has a potential advantage in a Draco he's not as sure of as he was before. -m From donnawonna at worldnet.att.net Sat Jan 21 02:49:17 2006 From: donnawonna at worldnet.att.net (Donna) Date: Fri, 20 Jan 2006 21:49:17 -0500 (Eastern Standard Time) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Book 1 Questions -- wands References: Message-ID: <43D1A12D.000004.04952@D33LDD51> No: HPFGUIDX 146786 -------Original Message------- From: latha279 Date: 01/20/06 19:55:52 To: HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Book 1 Questions -- wands > Miles: > it's obviously not standard that a wizard gets his own > and new wand when he starts at Hogwarts. > > Two of the main characters of Hogwarts students do not have or > had "own" wands, and we only know of few wand origins at all. > So for me, JKR wants to show us that getting a new wand of his > or her own for an eleven year old kid is not standard in the > wizarding world. Latha: We also see in PoA, that Sirius uses Ron's wand and later Snape's. Snape, whom Sirius hated too much - and still the wand worked for him. It all shows that whatever the wand, it is ultimately the wizard who is handling it that matters. The wizard would actually be directing his magical energy through a thought-process and connect that with the wand and channelize the magical energy. It With the wand being extremely important in doing magic, I'm wondering if it is wise to intentionally hand down used wands to the children to learn with. Mr. Ollivander states, "...you will never get such good results with another wizard's wand." And, twice he states that the wand chooses the wizard. (US version, SS, Ch 5) I feel that Ron had a hand-me-down wand because his parents couldn't afford to buy him a new wand. He had hand-me-down robes, used books, and a hand-me-down pet - Scabbers. Neville was using his father's wand because it WAS his fathers -sentimental value. At the same time, I don't believe a wizard is restricted to one wand over a lifetime. Mr. Ollivander says, speaking of Lilly, "It seems only yesterday she was in here herself, buying her first wand." US version, SS, Ch 5) Donna [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From kking0731 at gmail.com Sat Jan 21 02:59:38 2006 From: kking0731 at gmail.com (Kathy King) Date: Fri, 20 Jan 2006 21:59:38 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Spies, Lies and Self fullfilling prophecies In-Reply-To: References: <80f25c3a0601190519t6424ce7m4f399cae94f5385a@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146787 Neri snipped: If Peter can hide his Debt from a superb legilimen like Voldy, it seems he isn't such a hopeless occlumen as Pippin makes him appear. So maybe he managed to keep secrets from Dumbledore too? And now that I'm thinking about it, ESE!Lupin does know about Peter owing a Life Debt to Harry. So does he too hide this from Voldy? Why? What is his motivation here? But whatever his motivation is, he seems to trust Peter's ability to keep the secret from Voldy. Snow: Wouldn't that have to do with how you perceive Legilimency? If you notice when Dumbledore does Legilimency to Harry, or Snape with Harry, they bring round the subject first (is there something you wish to tell me Harry), which makes Harry bring the subject matter to the front of the brain allowing the Legilimence factor to be used. At least that's how I perceive it given Snape's statement that Legilimency is not like mind reading? therefore Voldemort would not be aware of the debt that Peter owes Unless Voldemort brought up the subject so he could gain access to the information. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From agdisney at msn.com Sat Jan 21 03:26:38 2006 From: agdisney at msn.com (agdisney) Date: Sat, 21 Jan 2006 03:26:38 -0000 Subject: Poison Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146788 Andie: Looking through HBP I came upon something that I can't figure out, maybe everyone else can? On the tower, Draco tells DD, "I got the idea of poisoning the mead from the Mudblood Granger as well. I heard her talking in the library about Filch not recognizing potions." pg 589 US Pg 307, Harry & Hermione are in the library: "--so it would be down to Filch to realize it wasn't a cough potion, and he's not a very good wizard, I doubt he can tell on potion from --" Hermione stopped dead: Harry had heard it too. somebody had moved close behind them among the dark bookshelves. they waited, and a moment later the vulturelike countenance of Madam Pince appeared... Who was actually listening in? Madam Pince was behind them listening. Draco isn't mentioned. Not that that matters but H & H were whispering. They should have noticed if anyone else was around. How did Draco overhear their conversation? From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Sat Jan 21 03:24:49 2006 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Sat, 21 Jan 2006 03:24:49 -0000 Subject: The GoF Train Scene - and beyond (was:Re: Humanity, Kant, Caricatures, and Draco In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146789 Magpie: > So with Draco I think the point Betsy is making is not that Draco > was best buddies with Cedric and Krum and secretly cried into his > pillow over Cedric's death. She's just saying that we shouldn't > assume he didn't have to repress any feelings of fear or confusion > over Cedric ending up dead and that this could play into the train > scene. I think he is able to repress them and postpone any real > awakening in GoF. In OotP he has to deal with some different issues > connected to his father's involvement with the DEs. It's in HBP, > imo, where he's really cracking. But I do think at the end of the > series I would not be surprised if we are able to see a shape to his > story that includes things like Cedric's death. Alla: Actually, I can buy your variation of this argument, BUT the only reason I can buy it that in light of HBP it is just as reasonable possibility as any others for Draco. Possibility that Draco was afraid because of Cedric died? Sure, why not? It is possible. I don't find it to be very likely, but I agree that it is possible. What I am not getting is how Draco's possible feelings of fear over Cedric's death trasform into his need to go to gryffs appartment and start mocking Cedric's death. > Betsy Hp: > And I do think Draco did some serious squelching. I think any hint > of conscious doubt would have been met with some major brick walls. > And I think Draco marching into the Gryffindor compartment and > spitting his defiance right into the lion's eye, as it were, was his > best attempt at regaining his balance. (Though I do think some > hairline fractures probably remained, or at least, there were some > new weak spots in Draco's belief system.) Alla: You make it sound as if Draco committed some heroic action, which makes me very confused. Magpie's "Draco having some fear over Cedric's death" I can buy as I said above. Defiance implies defying of someone who started bothering Draco first, IMO anyway. Maybe it is again semantics. Does defiance has another definition except "willingness to resist"? Who was bothering Draco first? Besides, he did not even come ALONE. I would have probably bought into his confusion more if he did. But, no, with all his emotional shake-up, he did not forget to take his goons with him. I wonder whether he expected to find Harry alone and start throwing hexes at him? Draco came into appartment to start a fight with the boy who was tortured and just witnessed a death of the classmate and to mock the death of that classmate. Where you find defiance, I am not sure. I think issuing any kind of challenges to Draco was the last thing on Harry's mind before Draco showed up and started provoking him. JMO, Alla From katmac at katmac.cncdsl.com Sat Jan 21 03:37:38 2006 From: katmac at katmac.cncdsl.com (lagattalucianese) Date: Sat, 21 Jan 2006 03:37:38 -0000 Subject: Remus, Sirius and Harry's desires for revenge--A hope about Lupin In-Reply-To: <20060120180256.5945.qmail@web31703.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146790 > ... > > Lia says: > ... > > Hence, therefore, ergo, I fervently wish that the sympathy I feel > for Lupin, brought on in part by how JKR has portrayed his problems, > is well-founded. To me, it might mean that the truly bad guys are > right otherwise. > > Lia, who can't bring herself to believe in an ESE! Lupin > La Gatta Lucianese: For me, the thing that argues against Lupin being ESE is that he is genuinely kind. I think it is that kindness that accounts for the sympathy you feel for him. He didn't have to be so gentle and understanding with Neville; what advantage was there for him in advancing Neville's skill in DADA or bolstering his confidence? To turn him into the kick-a@@ Neville we see in the Battle of the DoM? Did he think so badly of the boy's ability that he believed his influence would make no difference? I just can't see it that way. From geebsy at yahoo.com Sat Jan 21 03:21:55 2006 From: geebsy at yahoo.com (geebsy) Date: Sat, 21 Jan 2006 03:21:55 -0000 Subject: Harry Vanquishing LV without killing him. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146791 > La Gatta Lucianese: > > I like this. JKR has already foreshadowed the kind of existence a > soulless creature has, in the Death Eaters who have been kissed by a > dementor. Perhaps that will ultimately be Voldemort's fate--with all > his horcruxes destroyed, to have the last bit of soul sucked out of > him, so that nothing is left but that hideous pseudo-body he now > inhabits. Truly a fate worse than death. geebsy replies I like this as well. The thought of Harry having to kill (vanquish, destroy, etc) disturbs me. I realized that the Dementors could be used to ultimately deny Voldemort of life. Sucking his soul would render him 'perished', wouldn't it? And the destruction of the Horcruxes would prevent him from rising again. This seems a lot less traumatic than having Harry AV him. From agdisney at msn.com Sat Jan 21 03:42:22 2006 From: agdisney at msn.com (Andrea Grevera) Date: Fri, 20 Jan 2006 22:42:22 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: The Evil of Voldemort; Lily's choice References: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146792 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Andrea Grevera" ...> wrote: > > Maybe Voldy wanted to see if all mothers were the same. His mother, in his eyes, selfishly gave up her life and left Voldy to the orphanage. LV expected Lily be selfish too and to stand aside and save her life. Instead Lily did what Merope wouldn't or couldn't, she gave up her life so she could protect the life of her son and in doing so brought LV down with her. Tonks: I don't think that LV's mother "gave" her life. (JKR said that when Lily died for Harry, that no one had ever done that before.) LV's mother just died from the compactions of childbirth. At the time of Tom's birth women could still die in childbirth. She may have been weak from malnutrition and the stress of being homeless. Just because she was a witch doesn't mean that she could beat death. This is, of course, what her son tries to do. No doubt his mother's death had an impact on him. Probably a "what if" sort of thing. I am sure that it contributed to his twisted mentality somehow. But the point here is that Merope didn't "give" her life, she just died. Tonks_op Andie again: I'm sorry to disagree, but I don't think that Merope just died. Pg 262 US. "But she could do magic!"...Merope refused to raise her wand even to save her own life. "She wouldn't even stay alive for her son?" "Merope Riddle chose death in spite of a son who needed her"... That doesn't sound like she died of complications of childbirth. Her son or life didn't matter once Tom Sr. left her. She chose to die because she didn't want to go on. Lily chose to die to save her son. Before posting to any list, you MUST read the group's Admin File! http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/files/Admin_Files/HBF_Text__MUST_READ Please use accurate subject headings and snip unnecessary material from posts to which you're replying! Yahoo! Groups Links [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From agdisney at msn.com Sat Jan 21 03:52:59 2006 From: agdisney at msn.com (agdisney) Date: Sat, 21 Jan 2006 03:52:59 -0000 Subject: Dementors Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146793 Andie: I was wondering if JKR ever mentioned how Snape would deal with dementors. In POA Harry drives the dementors away before Snape arrives & takes him & Sirius to the castle. In HBP Harry is working on an essay for Snape on the best way to tackle dementors but he knows that he will receive a low mark because he didn't agree with Snape's way of doing it. pg 448 US. Is there a difference in how a Dark wizard communicates with dementors? From stevejjen at earthlink.net Sat Jan 21 06:19:23 2006 From: stevejjen at earthlink.net (Jen Reese) Date: Sat, 21 Jan 2006 06:19:23 -0000 Subject: The Evil of Voldemort; Lily's choice In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146794 Carol: > Can you give me any *canonical* evidence (outside the interviews) > that LV saw Lily as anything more than a "silly girl" or > Harry's "Muggle mother"? Yes, I know that the Prophecy states that > the *parents* had "thrice defied him" and he knew that Lily was a > member of the Order of the Phoenix, whose members the DE's were > picking off one by one. Jen: You can believe Voldemort if you want, a known liar and poor historian . Not agreeing with the canon offered so far isn't the same as saying there's no canonical evidence. You gave the examples of Hagrid and the DE's being told to 'stand aside' but they are not analogous to Lily's particular situation. The fact remains that no one else in canon who actively worked against Voldemort was offered multiple chances to live except Lily. And besides 'thrice defying him' and being an Order member, Lily was on Dumbledore's side and the mother of the boy born with the power to defeat the Dark Lord. She's a fairly unique enemy. I think the explanation that Voldemort underestimated *Lily* as well as the ancient magic, is a wonderful explanation which works well with the story. We just haven't been told that. There have been multiple times this simple explanation could have been dropped into the story and hasn't been. Resolving the mystery of Godric's Hollow is meant to be JKR's grand unveiling it looks like to me--the story started there and we will find out about Lily in 'two parts because both are very important in what Harry ends up having to do.' (Connection, 1999) I just don't think Voldemort's words alone are enough to discount the possibilities. Carol: > And that "foolish" sacrifice, in *JKR's* view, makes Lily's > sacrifice even more heroic than James's--because Lily didn't > have to die and James did. And it's Lily, stepping unarmed in > front of LV and offering herself in Harry's place, whose death > confers the blood protection that James's death does not. (That, I > think, is what JKR is trying to convey in the interview.) Again, > Lily's choice to die, not LV's motivation in allowing that choice, > is what matters. Jen: That's fine and a beautiful moment. I want to see it in the story. You want more canon for why Voldemort might view Lily as something other than a 'silly girl', well I want more than a shady interview answer. JKR was asked a simple question which you say has a simple answer, and she chose not to answer the question directly or even hedge. She was revealing information left and right, said HBP would close the doors on many theories. Until she's more definitive, I will go on believing Voldemort's actions were unusual. Carol: > Once he told her to "stand aside," for whatever reason, he made > the choice possible. And when she refused the chance to live and > he killed her, the ancient magic was invoked. There is, IMO, no > need to look for any motive beyond the desire to get down to the > business of killing Harry in LV's words. To do so would be like > saying, "Oh, he wanted Hagrid to live or he'd have killed him in > CoS" or "He wanted the Death Eaters to live or he'd have killed > them in GoF." The DEs and Hagrid were ordered to "stand aside" > because they were in his way, preventing him from accomplishing > his objective. I see no difference in his treatment of Lily, to > whom he uses the exact same phrase. Jen: I disagree. Voldemort had a reason not to kill Hagrid, two reasons: Alive he was a scapegoat and dead he was another murder and the final reason for closing Hogwarts and sending Riddle back to the orphange. And I don't get the DE example, given the fact they are his servants, not his opponents. Lily is not useful as a scapegoat or a servant. Tonks: > As to why Lily didn't have to die. There have been many ideas here. > One is that she worked in the Department of Mysteries and LV needed > to get information from her. Someone once said that since she was a > Mudblood she wasn't worth the bother. Also he may have wanted to > torture her with the memory of her son and husband's death so that > she would give LV the secrets in the Department of Mysteries that > would help him. OR it isn't anything really big and when we > find out we will all say.. "huh?? that is all there was to it?!" Jen: I do wonder about that last bit. More than once I've read into JKR's words in an interview only to be disappointed with the outcome. I do think Godric's Hollow will live up to expectations, whether there's more to Lily's story or not. Actually, my all-time favorite explanation for the Lily moment was sort of what Andrea mentioned upthread and what Orna went into greater detail in posts #146389 & 142817, that Voldemort expected Lily to act selfishly and save herself just as Merope had acted selfishly by dying (in his eyes) and not saving him from abandonment. It's hard to make the case given how detached Voldemort is from his past, yet it might fit in with the psychological analysis of Voldemort and his irrational obssessions. Jen R. From AllieS426 at aol.com Sat Jan 21 06:54:39 2006 From: AllieS426 at aol.com (allies426) Date: Sat, 21 Jan 2006 06:54:39 -0000 Subject: ESE!Lupin condensed In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146795 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "pippin_999" wrote: > > I know the threads are getting a bit tangled, so I'll try to summarize a bit. > The ESE!Lupin theory states that Lupin will be revealed as a villain in > Book Seven. What one might call the grand unified version of the theory > is as follows: Allie: It would take JKR one VERY LONG scene for Lupin to explain all that to Harry in the final moments! (It all has to come out in the end, the high points anyway.) As confusing as the Shrieking Shack was the first time around and 5 times longer! I am a little sad though because I think that this view must taint your whole Harry Potter experience. I don't buy it, but I give you a lot of credit for creativity! Thanks for summarizing, I've been reading bits and pieces of the ESE! Lupin theories for weeks. From hamstermap at yahoo.com Sat Jan 21 04:16:34 2006 From: hamstermap at yahoo.com (hamstermap) Date: Sat, 21 Jan 2006 04:16:34 -0000 Subject: Locket in Black house In-Reply-To: <20060121005420.84741.qmail@web53112.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146796 Magda: > What do you think happened to the locket? Was it really > thrown out? Or did Kreacher save it? hamstermap: I don't remember exactly what they did with it and should probably go back through but I'm sure that Kreacher must have know what it was. (I mean it had the Slytherin symbol right on it.) I'm going to go back through and see what they did with it. From theadimail at yahoo.co.in Sat Jan 21 08:50:22 2006 From: theadimail at yahoo.co.in (theadimail) Date: Sat, 21 Jan 2006 08:50:22 -0000 Subject: How did he know? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146797 I was wondering about how Voldemort could have found about the spell to make horcruxes eventhough it is supposed to be such a scret and unmentionable subject. He found it even while he was at Hogwarts, so how could a teen, no matter how talented, find such a thing without arousing the interest of Dumbledore who was, as he says, has been watching Tom Riddle, all the time,during his school days? Bye Adi From gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk Sat Jan 21 10:40:20 2006 From: gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk (Geoff Bannister) Date: Sat, 21 Jan 2006 10:40:20 -0000 Subject: Book 1 Questions -- wands In-Reply-To: <43D1A12D.000004.04952@D33LDD51> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146798 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Donna" wrote: Donna: > At the same time, I don't believe a wizard is restricted to one wand over a > lifetime. Mr. Ollivander says, speaking of Lilly, "It seems only yesterday > she was in here herself, buying her first wand." > US version, SS, Ch 5) Geoff: We know that for a fact. Ron has his wand broken in the Ford Anglia crash at the beginning of COS but he then shows Harry a brand new replacement wand when they first meet up at Florean Fortescue's Ice- Cream Parlour in POA. From willsonkmom at msn.com Sat Jan 21 14:36:05 2006 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Sat, 21 Jan 2006 14:36:05 -0000 Subject: Draco and Snape, what now? (wasThe GoF Train Scene - and beyond ( In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146799 > Annemehr: > I'm pulling for Draco, and I have been for pretty much the whole > series. In fact, my main beef against Snape has always been, not how > he treated Harry or Neville (obviously, they'll be fine), but how he > treated Draco, this boy in his house who's been raised by a Death > Eater and whose complete ease in Snape's presence suggested that Snape > had never challenged Draco's world view in any way. >snip< > But there's no arguing with the fact that HBP changes things. > > What are Snape and Draco supposed to do now? DDM!Snape is in a > quandary. He, by himself, could go back to LV and take what's coming. > Ceridwen posted (in msg. #146449) recently that he's no longer useful > now that he's no longer at Hogwarts, but I disagree; he's too talented > a wizard to be useless, even if his spy "cover" is blown. The trouble > is, he has Draco to protect -- Draco who now can have no illusions > about what LV's DEs mean to him. >snip< > Just turning him over to LV at this point will result > in Draco becoming murderer or murdered -- very tragic collateral > damage, just because of whose son he happened to be. Potioncat: I'm trying to catch up here, and although this post generated many replies and the thread itself is weaving all over the place, I haven't seen this part of Anne's post followed up. I agree. Snape's treatment of all those in his House is just as bad, even worse, than the way the Dursleys raised Dudley. Although we don't know what may have happened off page, Snape never seemed to correct Draco's behavior, nor model better behavior. Draco has no reason to think Snape is anything but a loyal follower of LV. And if Snape's role caused some problems protecting Harry at Hogwarts, protecting Draco will be a major difficulty at Villa de Voldy. He's been protecting Draco and Harry for 6 years, I doubt he'd stop now. How will he manage it. Good point about Draco's occlumency...but if Snape can recognise its use, LV certainly could. I was never pulling for Draco. Nothing in the text made me think he was worthy of any compassion. Nothing in JKR's interviews made me think he was anything but a horrible boy. DD's actions on the Tower changed my mind. It was of great importance to DD that Draco be saved from himself, I can't imagine that Snape would abandon that mission. From nkafkafi at yahoo.com Sat Jan 21 15:29:25 2006 From: nkafkafi at yahoo.com (nkafkafi) Date: Sat, 21 Jan 2006 15:29:25 -0000 Subject: ESE!Lupin condensed In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146800 Pippin wrote: > > I know the threads are getting a bit tangled, so I'll try to summarize a bit. > The ESE!Lupin theory states that Lupin will be revealed as a villain in > Book Seven. What one might call the grand unified version of the theory > is as follows: > Neri: First, congratulations for what is arguably the grandest HP conspiracy theory. I'd say much grander than MAGIC DISHWASHER, which was after all concerned almost exclusively with the Shrieking Shack night. So your place in the Safe House is safe forever (or at least until the Safe House itself is washed into TBAY by Hurricane Jo #7). And now to the details: > Pippin: > Lupin was instrumental in the prank, as Snape suspected. Neri: Aside of Snape's suspicion there is about zero evidence for that, and Snape suspicion is hardly reliable, since he suspected James even more than he suspected Lupin, and was apparently wrong about it. > Pippin: > Needing an alias to hide > behind while working undercover with the werewolves, he used the > name Wormtail. > Neri: An amazingly lucky shot for ESE!Lupin, considering the Potters and Sirius later decided about Peter as the Secret Keeper of their own volition. And despite using the code name "Wormtail" it was not Peter that Sirius suspected, but Remus. So if I understand correctly, the sole reason we need the "Wormtail" misdirection is to explain JKR saying in a chat, *not* in the books themselves, that Wormtail killed Cedric. I'd much prefer that such a central clue/red-herring would be given in the books themselves. > Pippin: > Lupin found it difficult to gain the werewolves' trust and may have > compromised himself in order to get it. Neri: Er... I probably missed it, but was there any reason to think Lupin was involved with the werewolves during VW1 ? > Pippin: > > He then pursued Peter, who was also pursued by Sirius. When > Sirius confronted Peter, Lupin tried to kill Peter but missed, blowing > open the street and unintentionally killing the Muggles. Peter > took advantage of the situation and escaped in rat form, leaving > his amputated finger and bloodied robes behind him. Lupin made > himself believe that Sirius was a Death Eater and it was his curse that > must have done the damage. > Neri: I probably missed this last part too. I can't understand how could ESE!Lupin convince himself that Sirius was a DE and why is it even needed. > Pippin: > Lupin set up the Lestranges, sending them after the Longbottoms and > arranging for them to be caught, unfortunately too late for Frank and Alice. > With everyone who could identify him as a double agent disposed of, Neri: And today Bella is just fine with that? > Pippin: > Since Quirrell was under suspicion, it was Lupin who met with Hagrid > at the Hogs Head. He also killed the unicorns. > Neri: I thought Hagrid said that the unicorns could *not* be killed by a werewolf? > Pippin: > Lupin was instrumental in the Diary plot, knowing, as JKR says on her > website, that it could have made present day Voldemort stronger. > Neri: My apologies, I missed that part too. Canon? > Pippin: > Lupin spotted Peter's picture in the Daily Prophet and took the > DADA position. Neri: So you think Lupin knew Peter was alive. And he was *inside* the castle the whole year, and he had never tried getting rid of Peter himself? > Pippin: >When he saw Sirius at the Quidditch game, he > summoned the dementors. Neri: So ESE!Lupin was trying to kill Sirius during PoA. There are so many simpler ways he could have done it. The simplest would be telling the Ministry that Sirius is a Black dog animagus and how he enters the grounds. I can think of several different ways to tell that without revealing the Marauders story. Another way would be to ambush Sirius himself near the Willow, kill him and win the all the glory. A third way would be to leave Sirius a note in the Shrieking Shack or in the tunnel, writing that he now believes in Sirius' innocence and that they should meet, and ambushing Sirius at the meeting place. Finally, when Lupin breaks into the Shack, wand at ready, and sees Sirius on the floor without a wand, he should kill him on the spot and *then* take care of Scabbers. > Pippin: > When he spotted Peter on the Marauder's > Map, he stole wolfsbane potion from Snape's cauldron and drank it > before running out to the shack. Neri: He was composed enough to steal the wolfsbane potion after he spotted Peter on the map, and yet he forgot the Map opened on his desk? And why didn't he simply ask Snape for a cup? > Pippin: > Once there, he encouraged Sirius > to tell his story. Neri: Why? I'd think ESE!Lupin would do anything to keep the Marauders' story hidden. He had all the wands in his hands, the trio were convinced that Sirius was an insane murderer and they obviously didn't have a clue who Scabbers was. Much easier to stupefy Sirius, call the demenetors, and go for Peter while the trio pass out. > Pippin: > Once he was certain that Sirius no longer believed > that he, Lupin had been the spy, and that Sirius blamed Peter > for the Muggle deaths, he meant to help Sirius kill Peter, but Harry > intervened. Neri: It was Lupin who *stopped* Sirius, with considerable effort, from killing Peter before the whole story was out. And it was Sirius' idea that they'd kill Peter together. > Pippin: > > He then forced Peter to return to Voldemort and cooperate in > the rebirthing scheme. Neri: Then why didn't he do that himself long before that? > Pippin: > It was he, AKA "Wormtail" who killed Cedric. > Neri: I'm trying to imagine the graveyard scene with ESE!Lupin, and I'm failing. How was he hiding from Harry? Even if he was wearing an invisibility cloak, was he making sure Harry shuts his eyes in pain before each and every move? And why going to so much trouble at all? Harry wasn't supposed to get out of the graveyard alive. > Pippin: > Lupin told Sirius that a record of the prophecy was stored in the > DoM, mistakenly believing that Dumbledore would share this information > with Harry. Lupin put Podmore under the Imperius curse and made him > try to break into the DoM. > > When Sirius revealed that he thought Harry knew about the prophecy, > Lupin had no choice but to kill him. Neri: I know we went over this more than once, but frankly I can't hold it in my brain, and so I completely fail to understand why ESE!Lupin had to tell Sirius about the prophecy in the first place and why he had to kill Sirius later. Incidentally, I think one of the main disadvantages of ESE!Lupin, as of MAGIC DISHWASHER, is that they're so complicated you just can't hold them in your brain. > Pippin: > Lupin "ran" Draco in HBP, put > Tonks under the Imperius curse to use as a messenger, and arranged for > Fenrir and another Death Eater to escape from the castle. > Neri: Just out of perverse curiosity, did ESE!Lupin also imperio Tonks to fall in love with him? Or did she fell in love with him of her own volition, and if so did she do that before or after he impriused her? And are we going to get the saucy details in Book 7 or are we left to imagine them? > Pippin: > Well, there you have it. Shorn of its supporting canon, it's not hard to > explain. Linking it to the clues is complex, but JKR doesn't have > to do that anymore than she had to explain all the hints about Barty > Crouch Jr, or H/G. Neri: Umm... Barty's veritaserum confession took 7 pages in GoF, in addition to 3 pages of voluntary bragging and 2 pages of Dumbledore's explanations, to a total of almost one chapter, with some questions (like Barty's part in the Longbottoms affair) still left unanswered, and that was after only *one* book. I'd imagine the final confession of ESE!Lupin would take at least three chapters, smack in the middle of the Big Climax. As Pip!squeak used to write, I'd recommend a cup of tea and a biscuit. > Pippin: > The other anvil-sized hint is the matter we've been discussing recently, > that there are discrepancies between Peter Pettigrew's character and > the things he would have had to do to function as the spy. He does > not seem to be a talented sneak, so the Potters and Sirius should > have noticed that something was wrong. If they didn't notice because > he was no longer close to them, then it becomes untenable that Sirius > only suspected Lupin because only Lupin and Peter were close enough. > > > I agree that ESE!Lupin would need to tell Voldemort about Peter's > life debt, but how do we know he hasn't? Voldemort's suspicions > about Peter at the beginning of GoF certainly indicate some > concern about Peter's attitude towards to Harry. > Not concern enough, certainly, but this is, after all, deep magic, > magic at its most impenetrable, exactly the sort of magic that > Dumbledore says Voldemort has always discounted. > Neri: Two problems here. In GoF we are shown no less than three occasions in which Voldy accuses Peter of disloyalty, and in one of these cases he also punishes him severely. In two of these cases he doesn't have any reason to suspect somebody else hears what he says, an in the third case Harry is a witness, but Voldy doesn't have a reason to think Harry will ever get away. And yet, Voldy never mentions that Peter owes Harry his life. Even assuming Voldy doesn't understand the magical part of the Life Debt, I find it very hard to believe that he knows what happened and doesn't bring it up against Peter in any of these three occasions. Even worse, Peter's magical weakness and inability to keep a secret were supposed to be an "anvil size" clue for ESE!Lupin, only it's hardly anvil size if Peter manages to keep his Life Debt a secret from Voldy. So now you are developing a rather speculative theory only in order to explain how the clue to your first theory *is* anvil size. I think something is faulty with this logic. Finally, I think the main problem with ESE!Lupin is that, as a shattering end-of-the-series-that-is-only-one-book-away revelation, it doesn't explains any of what I consider to be the "official" big mysteries that must to be solved in the HP saga. Like why did Snape change sides and why did Dumbledore trust him? How did Harry get Voldy's powers and a direct link into his mind? What was the gleam in Dumbledore's eyes about? What really happened with the UV/ on the tower? Where are the Horcruxes hidden? How is Harry going to kill Voldemort? Instead, ESE!Lupin mainly "solves" mysteries that are officially already solved, like who was the spy that betrayed the Potters, and things that were never even presented as mysteries in the first place, like who killed Cedric and who killed Sirius. Admittedly it also "solves" a few B Class mysteries like who sent the Lestranges and who asked Voldy to spare Lily (assuming there was one) but in these cases ESE!Lupin is only one suspect out of several, and the advantages of him being the culprit rather than any of the others are nil. In short, it seems to me you first shot your arrow ("Lupin is Ever So Evil") and now you are painting a magnificent target around it. Neri From gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk Sat Jan 21 15:40:39 2006 From: gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk (Geoff Bannister) Date: Sat, 21 Jan 2006 15:40:39 -0000 Subject: Draco (Re: The GoF Train Scene (was:Re: Humanity, Kant, Caricatures, and Draco)) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146801 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "quick_silver71" wrote: Quick_Silver: > I disagree. There seems to be a view in fandom that Draco is somehow > in really big trouble with Voldemort and that his life is going to > be in danger. Everyone, including Draco's own mother, didn't think > that he'd be able to complete his task yet Draco basically did > complete it. He got a group of Death Eaters into Hogwarts and > managed to get Dumbledore at the mercy of his wand. These are hardly > insufficient tasks that Draco completed in the service of the Dark > side. Voldemort may have wanted Draco to fail so that he could > punish Lucius but instead Draco did something even better...he > eliminated Dumbledore (or caused the situation that led to > Dumbledore's death). > I could be completely wrong and Draco could be in huge trouble from > Voldemort but IMO there's just as likely a chance that we'll see > Voldemort pinning medals on Draco's and Snape's chests in book 7 for > a job while done. Geoff: My interpretation of canon goes against your suggested view. Looking at the scene at Spinner's End, we see the following clues: '"That's why he's chosen Draco, isn't it?" she (Narcissa) persisted. "To punish Lucius?" "If Draco succeeds," said Snape, still looking away from her, "he will be honoured above all others." "But he won't succeed!" sobbed Narcissa. "How can he, when the Dark Lord himself-?" Bellatrix gasped; Narcissa seemed to loe her nerve. "I only meant... that nobody has yet succeeded..."' (HBP "Spinner's End" p.38 UK edition) 'Snape caught hold of her wrists and removed her clutching hands. Looking down into her tear-stained face, he said slowly, "He intends me to do it in the end, I think. But he is determined that Draco should try first. You see, in the unlikely event that Draco succeeds, I shall be able to remain at Hogwarts a little longer, fulfilling my useful role as spy." "In other words, it doesn't matter to him if Draco is killed!" "The Dark Lord is very angry," repeated Snape quietly. "He failed to hear the prophecy. You know as well as I do, Narcissa, that he does not forgive easily." (ibid. p.39) I thikn this, plus the fact that Snape takes the Unbreakable Vow to protect Draco from harm, suggests that there is cause for concern regarding Draco. Again, Draco himself is fearful for his life: 'Draco Malfoy was standing with his back to the door, his hands clutching either side of the sink, his white-blond head bowed. "Don't," crooned Moaning Myrtle's voice from one of the cubicles. "Don't... Tell me what's wrong... I can help you..." "No one can help me," said Malfoy. His whole body was shaking. "I can't do it... I can't... it won't work... and unless I do it soon... he says he'll kill me..." (HBP "Sectumsempra" p.488 UK edition) Now this might refer to Malfoy repairing the Vanishing Cabinet and getting the Death Eaters into the school rather than killing Dumbledore but Draco is obviously in fear of his life. He is shaking and crying. This hardly suggests that Voldemort will be pinning medals on Draco since he really only completed half his task. Snape - for whatever motive - completed Draco's task as he had promised Narcissa at Spinner's End. I have on more than one occasion said that I do not believe that Draco is irredeemable. That, by the way, does not mean that I necessarily think he /will/ be redeemed because if a person refuses to hear or see what is to be done for redemption, then ultimately they reach a point of being unable to see or hear anything. Again, I have more than once pointed members to the fate of the dwarves in C.S.Lewis' "The Last Battle" which chronicles the end of Narnia when they refuse to believe in the existence of Aslan. Anyone, however, wicked has an opportunity to be redeemed. It is in the very central core of Christianity. When considering Draco, I sometimes find myself thinking of Saul of Tarsus, before he went to Damascus. He was a man who had set his mind like flint against the early Christian church, who rooted out believers and dragged them off to prison, who consented in the stoning of Stephen, standing by and holding the coats of those who hurled the rocks. And then, possibly with the foundation of his enmity being undermined by the way in which Christians responded to persecution, his meeting with the risen Christ on the Damascus road completed the rethink. And from this came St.Paul, possibly the greatest of the early missionaries. Of course, much depends on Draco's whereabouts now. If he has been hauled off to Voldemort, he could well be in extreme danger. On the other hand, if Snape /is/ Dumbledore's man (and for me the jury has been out for years on just what to decide about him), he may well have spirited our young friend off to a safer place - if that exists in the troubled Wizarding World. From coriolan at worldnet.att.net Sat Jan 21 16:55:57 2006 From: coriolan at worldnet.att.net (Caius Marcius) Date: Sat, 21 Jan 2006 16:55:57 -0000 Subject: FILK: Harridan Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146802 Harridan To the tune of Harrigan by George M. Cohan Lyrics and a MIDI here: http://tinyurl.com/7kdpz Enter BELLATRIX LESTRANGE & a CHORUS OF DEATH EATERS CHORUS OF DEATH EATERS Who is the Slytherin gal who's a femme fatale? BELLATRIX Harridan, that's me! CHORUS OF DEATH EATERS Whose rationale got Snape Vowing Unbreakables? BELLATRIX Harridan, that's me! I served a few years for my felonies Now the Ministry knows, no repellin' me I'm Draco's aunt and a Death-Eating termagant BELLATRIX /& CHORUS Harridan, that's me/she! CHORUS OF DEATH EATERS H - A - double-R - I - D - A - N spells Harridan. BELLATRIX Sirius is now playing the harp, be- -Cause I'm a vile vicious harpy BELLATRIX /& CHORUS H - A - double-R - I - D - A - N, you see, There's no spell can dispel this heavy-lidded Jezebel Harridan, that's me/she! CHORUS OF DEATH EATERS Who's all aglow when they call her a virago? BELLATRIX Harridan, that's me! CHORUS OF DEATH EATERS Who is the chick who can flick a cruel Crucio? BELLATRIX Harridan, that's me! My evil young nephew is fond of me, Because I have taught him Occlumency, I'm the belle with a cause who gets awful darn bellicose. BELLATRIX /& CHORUS Harridan, that's me/she! CHORUS OF DEATH EATERS H - A - double-R - I - D - A - N spells Harridan. BELLATRIX Neville for his parents feels sadness- Since I drove them past the point of madness BELLATRIX B - E - double-L - A - T - R - I -X, me! BELLATRIX /& CHORUS That's the name of the dame serving the Lord we dare not name Bellatrix, that's me/she! - CMC HARRY POTTER FILKS http://home.att.net/~coriolan/hpfilks.htm (updated today with 42 new filks) From R.Vink2 at chello.nl Sat Jan 21 17:27:15 2006 From: R.Vink2 at chello.nl (Renee) Date: Sat, 21 Jan 2006 17:27:15 -0000 Subject: ESE!Lupin condensed In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146803 Renee: During one of my increasingly rare lurking sessions, I happened upon the condensed ESE!Lupin post. A very useful summary: I've always had trouble following the full version. This condensed version is mostly comprehensible, though still rather convoluted, IMO. A few posts back, Neri voiced a number of objections, some of which I share, but he did not addres the following contention: Pippin: > Lupin learned of the prophecy. He bargained with Voldemort to > save Lily, revealing that Peter was the secret keeper. Renee: I don't get this - probably because I missed the extended version of this part of the theory. But how did Lupin know Peter was the Secret Keeper? Who is supposed to have told him? Arguably, only four people knew about the Secret Keeper switch to Peter: Sirius, the Potters and Peter himself. Everyone else, including DD, believed Sirius was the SK. So, who of these four informed Remus? Sirius? Certainly not. In the Shrieking Shack, he confirms that he switched without telling Lupin. (It would have been beyond stupid if he'd told him, as it's canon he suspected Lupin to be the spy.) James and Lily? I don't think so. Even if Sirius kept his suspicion of Remus to himself - unlikely as this may be - they would have guessed from which quarter the wind blew. The spy was "someone close to the Potters". It wasn't Sirius, or he would not have proposed the switch in the first place. They didn't think it was Peter, or they wouldn't have gone along with Sirius's suggestion to switch. So they, too, must have suspected the only remaining alternative: Lupin. There is no other option. Lily telling Lupin about the switch because she does not believe it's him, doesn't work, because the only other possible spy is Peter. If Lupin is innocent, Peter is not. And unless Lily's 100% convinced of Peter's innocence, she'll never consent to making the switch. (And no. Lily being overruled by James is NOT believable.) Which leaves Peter. According to the ESE!Lupin theory, he was not the spy, but perfectly innocent the moment he was made SK. This would mean we're dealing with a situation in which a perfectly innocent Peter is made SK instead of Sirius. *This* Peter knows he's not the spy. He knows it can't be Sirius either, or Sirius would never have proposed the switch (see under James and Lily). Ergo, it must be Lupin. Therefore, Innocent!Peter needs to be extraordinarily daft to tell Lupin who the real SK is. So, is this the situation in the ESE!Lupin theory: Peter tells Lupin he's the SK, because he is too stupid to add up one and one, and realise Lupin is the spy? Curiously, Renee From darkmatter30 at yahoo.com Sat Jan 21 18:17:22 2006 From: darkmatter30 at yahoo.com (Richard) Date: Sat, 21 Jan 2006 18:17:22 -0000 Subject: How did he know? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146804 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "theadimail" wrote: > > I was wondering about how Voldemort could have found about the spell > to make horcruxes eventhough it is supposed to be such a scret and > unmentionable subject. He found it even while he was at Hogwarts, so > how could a teen, no matter how talented, find such a thing without > arousing the interest of Dumbledore who was, as he says, has been > watching Tom Riddle, all the time,during his school days? > > Bye > Adi > Richard here: We can't know how he learned of horcruxes until JKR tells us, of course, but it isn't difficult to imagine ways he might have leared at least something about them. Remember, in this scene of Slughorn's memory, Tom is already a "middle teen," and has had a few years of magical education, has long known how to find Diagon Alley, is accustomed to operating on his own, and is inquisitive ... So, it isn't difficult to imagine him discovering Knockturn Alley, and all the dark wonders it holds. I'm sure there are places other than Borgin and Burkes, including the odd book stall, that he might have visited, and perhaps leafed through the odd tome. Given what we are told of his intelligence and talent, I can easily imagine him finding reference to horcruxes, then going out of his way to learn more. We also have to remember that he had to have had some contact with Borgin at Borgin and Burkes for him to have gotten a jog there. While that COULD have been entirely after his graduation from Hogwarts, I'm sure there had to be more and earlier contact. He may well have been working for them during the previous summer, legally or otherwise, and Borgin likely knew quite well about this young lads talent, interest and complete lack of moral and ethical constraint. He and most any other vendor of truly dark items might well welcome such a young man, both because of his willingness to deal with dark subjects, but also because they might see him as a potential future customer. After all, how could one be that talented, and that skilled that young, and not end up with a largish and quite full vault at Gringot's? Given all this, I think he came across the "recipe" for Horcruxes during one summer break, and managed to memorize the spell and any other requirements. He already possessed the ring (the diary could have been bought any time), and a soul torn by the murders of his father and grandparents, so with the reinforcement of Slughorn's comments regarding a sevenfold division of his soul, I think much of the intervening "lost" years were consumed by trying to find suitable objects for conversion into horcruxes, quests for additional means of securing immortality, developing means to protect the tools and objects created for that purpose, and commiting the crimes that funded all this. He simply left Hogwarts with a head- and running- start on all this. Richard, who thinks the greatest guarantee of the ability of anyone to commit acts of true evil is a lack of empathy for others. From darkmatter30 at yahoo.com Sat Jan 21 18:28:01 2006 From: darkmatter30 at yahoo.com (Richard) Date: Sat, 21 Jan 2006 18:28:01 -0000 Subject: Poison In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146805 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "agdisney" wrote: > > Andie: > > Looking through HBP I came upon something that I can't figure out, > maybe everyone else can? > > On the tower, Draco tells DD, "I got the idea of poisoning the mead > from the Mudblood Granger as well. I heard her talking in the library > about Filch not recognizing potions." pg 589 US > > Pg 307, Harry & Hermione are in the library: "--so it would be down to > Filch to realize it wasn't a cough potion, and he's not a very good > wizard, I doubt he can tell on potion from --" > Hermione stopped dead: Harry had heard it too. somebody had moved > close behind them among the dark bookshelves. they waited, and a > moment later the vulturelike countenance of Madam Pince appeared... > > Who was actually listening in? Madam Pince was behind them listening. > Draco isn't mentioned. Not that that matters but H & H were > whispering. They should have noticed if anyone else was around. > > How did Draco overhear their conversation? > Richard here: We have to accept the prima facie evidence of canon as "fact," so Draco DID overhear this conversation. We simply don't know where Draco was in the library ... perhaps one stack away looking for a book with information on vanishing cabinets. Further, we are not told that Madame Pince is the person they first hear, only that she appeared "a moment later." It may well have been Draco they heard when he moved to conceal what he was doing or the book he held from Madame Pince. Given Draco's increasing concern about actually accomplishing his task, and thereby avoiding death, I can't imagine him NOT trying just about every resource available, including the Hogwarts library, which we know has only failed Hermione once, and that on the subject of Horcruxes. Given his certain dread of being discovered in his efforts, I also imagine he would be very careful to avoid others discovering what he was investigating. So, I think Harry and Hermione heard Draco, and coincidentally saw Madame Pince. Richard From iris_ft at yahoo.fr Sat Jan 21 18:48:13 2006 From: iris_ft at yahoo.fr (iris_ft) Date: Sat, 21 Jan 2006 18:48:13 -0000 Subject: CHAPDISC: HBP8, Snape Victorious Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146806 Apologies for bringing back an already "old" tread (discussions on this group are so fast!), and congratulations to Sherry for the thought provoking job. Discussion questions 1. This is the first mention of nonverbal spells in the book, though it becomes important later as we know. Did it catch you at all at this point, or did you just pass over it as you wondered how he'd get out of this pickle? Yes, I thought it could be important when I read the book for the first time. And I think what is here just a narrative detail is actually a key element. From the previous chapters, we could guess that Dumbledore was going to play an important part in the novel, and here, when Harry tries to liberate himself, he tries to imitate his mentor. We couldn't find a better metaphor for what will happen all along the rest of the book. Dumbledore is more than an example for Harry; he's the one who shows him the path, his guide. And when we reach the end of chapter 26, we can say that Harry has perfectly managed to follow him:, even to overpass him. He's by now he who protects, not the contrary. He has become Dumbledore's equal and is nearly ready to take the whole burden. But it all starts while he is helpless aboard the Hogwarts Express, and thinks of the old wise man. By the way, he already imitates him unwillingly: his nose is broken, like Dumbledore's. More generally, we can say that Harry's situation foreshadows what will happen at the end of the book, on the Astronomy Tower. Harry will be petrified under the Cloak again, and as he'll try to reach Snape after Dumbledore's death, he'll have to run through bloody corridors. One last thing about this sequence: Dumbledore's silences can be very eloquent indeed. We are told that Dumbledore is able to perform magic without speaking. It's not the only thing he does silently. There's what Dumbledore declares and what he doesn't say. I finished the book with the uncomfortable but exciting feeling that maybe, we should care for what remains unsaid or invisible, because it's probably where the truth is hidden. There's the Room of Requirement in the castle, the Invisibility Cloak, the silent spells. In HBP, JK Rowling gives much importance to what remains secret, or unformulated. Is the truth hiding in what she didn't write? 2. Harry despises himself for wishing there would be the sound of panic, people wondering what had happened to him. He has always hated his celebrity, but in this situation, it might have helped. Later in the chapter, when he is at the Gryffindor table and feeling embarrassed, he hopes the students will just assume he was off doing something heroic. How do you feel about his thoughts in this situation? Does it seem inconsistent, practical, or natural to you? I find it touching, because it shows Harry's fragility. He's the Chosen One, but he isn't ready to take the burden. Harry isn't ready yet to assume his new position, even if he knows that he has by now responsibilities. He despises himself for hoping that the others will worry for him or try to help him. He knows that he's alone on the path. It's the first evidence of the clairvoyance he'll develop little by little all along the book, and that'll make him declare "I'm the Chosen One", or realize that "there was no comforting whisper in the dark that he was safe really (chapter 26)". He will protect the others, not the contrary. But for the moment, he's still very fragile, and in spite of his beginning clairvoyance, in spite of his self consciousness, he would be happy if he could be travelling with the rest of the students. Harry is exceptional, but he would like to stay with the others. He's quite the opposite of Tom Marvolo Riddle in chapter 13, who is aware of his particular status and remains willingly isolated because he despises the others. Harry, when he is isolated, feels hopeless, and he hates Malfoy, who left him alone and is with them in one of the carriages going to the school. Harry doesn't understand everything yet. For example, he doesn't understand that Draco is a chosen one too, even if he travels the wrong path. Concerning him, Harry will go from pure loathing to compassion. He is on the right path, even if for the moment it's painful, as often in his journey. You wrote at the end of your post you didn't know there were so many things in this chapter. You are right; far from being a "transition chapter", it's one of the most crucial in the novel, because it shows important things concerning Harry. 4. Some have said that we didn't see enough of Harry grieving for Sirius. What do you think of this scene, with Harry's thoughts about Tonks and his inability to talk to her about Sirius? Does this show his grief to you? Of course it shows his grief, and also his fragility. When people loose someone they love, they don't react in the same way. Some of them need to talk, other need to remain silent. I suppose Harry belongs in the second category, probably because of his childhood. As an abused child, he probably had to learn to keep his feelings for himself. His silence is like a shield. 5. I just noticed this when working on this chapter and actually reading it in braille instead of hearing audio where I can't tell how a sentence is punctuated. Snape tells Tonks that Harry is "quite--ah--safe in my hands." Is there any implication in his words here, or is it just done for emphasis, to add some sharpness, for Harry's benefit? Or for Tonks? Just curious about how this was written. Any thoughts? I like that narrative detail, because it summarises Snape so well! In this chapter, Snape is shown in his inherent ambiguity. Holding a lantern, he reminds of Diogenes, or of the Hermit in Tarot. They are positive references (notice by the way that Diogenes was cynical, just like old Severus). At the same time, he's as usually despective and sarcastic. And there's more: in chapter 17, young Voldemort appears on the doorstep of the House of Gaunt holding an old- fashioned lamp. He's looking for someone too. We can't deny there's a similitude between the two apparitions. And isn't this similitude disturbing, if we remember that in chapter 17, young Voldemort is about to kill his father? I'm completely unable to decide whether Snape is a true villain or whether he's wearing a mask. May as it be, in this chapter, he plays for Harry the part of the gatekeeper. And we have the strange feeling that he's actually he who rules the castle. Notice what JK Rowling writes when she describes the way the chains that close the gate move: "the chains SNAKED backwards" and "they SLITHERED, clinking, back into place". The detail is rather disturbing. It sounds as if Hogwarts were ensnared by snakes, and we know that snakes have a negative connotation in the series. These chains remind of the Devil Snare, or of the Basilisk. In other words, Slytherin is surrounding the castle, even ruling it, maybe. Dumbledore made everything he could to protect the place from an exterior attack. But this time, the attack will come from inside, after nearly one year of preparation, just like in PS/SS, CoS and GoF. That's probably why JK Rowling makes a reference to the flying car of CoS. In this book too, Harry doesn't come to the school with the others, and Snape welcomes him. Harry had to fight a Basilisk and a memory at the end of his second year. This time, he'll fight Snape. The snake is ready to bite, waiting for its time to come. Shall we consider that Snape is like the snake in the fable, you know, the one that bites the helpful hand that had saved it when it was in danger? What does he mean actually when he declares that Harry "is quite ?ah ? safe in[ his] hands"? Does he hold a lantern because he will become Harry's guide, through his old Potions book? Or does he hold a lantern because he's like Lucifer, ready to rebel himself against he who gave him his privileged position? We'll have to wait till Book seven to know the truth, supposing JK Rowling is ready to tell us. 6. Later in HBP, we learn that Tonks' patronus is now a wolf, and we're led to suspect it has changed because of her love for Remus. But here at this point, we don't know any of that yet. Why do you think Snape made these comments about her patronus? He hasn't seemed to have any particular feelings one way or the other about Tonks previously; in fact, did we ever see them interact before? Why does he say that her patronus is weak? What do you think about the whole significance of the changing patronus? Does it foreshadow events yet to come, or are there implications about Lupin in Snape's comments? When we read the book for the first time, we wonder whether the "new Tonks" is important or not. Her visible change puzzles the reader. Her strange and unusual behaviour could mean that she could be into trouble because she's a double agent. We'll finally learn that she loves Lupin; so we can consider her change as a trick JK Rowling uses in order to mislead the reader. What is actually interesting about Tonks is that she seems "older and much more serious and purposeful." And Harry wonders: "Was this all the effect of what had happened at the Ministry?" We could say these sentences fit Harry too. JK Rowling masters perfectly the art of misleading her reader; I think the Patronus is an example of this art. But it could be also an important reminder. I think that, all along the sequence "Harry/Tonks", the most important, from a narrative point of view, is hidden behind trivial appearances: someone in the castle is an impostor and/or a traitor. JK Rowling refers to what happened in CoS, when Tonks wants to heal Harry's nose. Some lines after, Tonks produces a Patronus, and Harry remembers that he has seen Dumbledore send messages like this. Here, JK Rowling refers to GoF, chapter 28, `The madness of Mr Crouch'. When we reach the end of the fourth book, we are told that most of what happens in this chapter is based upon illusion, that there has been what the characters have seen and believed, and what have happened actually. In CoS, the DADA teacher was an impostor. In GoF, he was both an impostor and a traitor. Shouldn't we consider that in HBP, chapter 8, the story is about to repeat itself? JK Rowling tells us the truth, and misleads us with it, presenting it as if it were a wink (a reference to Lockhart's disastrous healing demonstration), or occulting it behind a red herring (why is Tonks so different? What does her strange Patronus represent?). And when Snape shows himself on the top of the Astronomy Tower, we'll remain petrified, just like Harry. 10. Is there any significance to the fact that Trelawney is at the start of term feast? Is this only the second time we've seen her at the feast? Yes, there's an important significance. As JK Rowling writes, Trelawney's the one who made the prediction concerning Harry. Harry used to consider her as fraud before he knew the Prophecy. Trelawney is the other character treated with ambiguity in the novel. Is she trustworthy? We'll meet her regularly in the novel (chapters 10, 15, 20, 25), and each time she'll show a double face. On one hand, she's a drunk and jealous woman. On the other one, what she reads in her playing cards is rather disturbing, because it happens to announce the end of the book. One of her cards, the Lightning- Struck Tower, even gives a whole chapter its title The more I read chapter 8, the more I think it mirrors nearly the whole book. 12. Throughout the book, Harry asks about Dumbledore's hand, and he is repeatedly told that he'll learn what happened later. He never does. Will the exact details of what happened to the hand be important later, either in what Harry has to do or in understanding what happened on the tower? Another time, it looks like a narrative detail, but it isn't. What Hermione tells Harry about Dumbledore's hand foreshadows several important revelations involving magic. Hermione says there are injuries you can't cure. It's a good definition for what happens when a wizard uses a Horcrux. The ring Horcrux harmed Dumbledore's hand, and it had the same effect on Voldemort's soul. Is there a medicine for that kind of injuries? Is Harry's loving heart the medicine? After all, since the first novel, we know there's a strong tie between the boy and the Philosopher Stone, which is said to be a universal medicine. Will Harry show enough compassion so he'll be able to heal Voldemort's soul? In chapter 13, he shows something that looks like compassion when he asks Dumbledore why Merope Gaunt didn't stay alive for her son. But will Voldemort accept the medicine? Hermione announces also what is going to happen later when she talks about "old curses" and "poisons without antidote". The "old curses" we find in the book are the one concerning the DADA function (it's jinxed since Lord Voldemort's last visit to Hogwarts), the Horcruxes and also the "Sectumsempra" spell. As for the poison without antidote, we'll find it in the Cave. 14. I have racked my brains and can't remember any place in the books where it is stated as fact that Dumbledore did not trust Snape and that is why he has never given him the DADA post before. Is this a case of rumor and gossip becoming fact over time? Why indeed did Dumbledore give or not give Snape the job? Has Snape really wanted it all these years? Did you think about the DADA curse when you heard that Snape had the position? Was Harry correct in detecting the look of triumph on Snape's face? He hates him so much, that every expression must be well known to him, yet his hatred may not make him a very reliable judge of such things. Snape doesn't look particularly happy to get the job. JK Rowling says that he "merely raises a hand in lazy acknowledgement of the applause from the Slytherin table", and she mentions "a look of triumph", but she adds it's Harry's personal impression. And after Slughorn's nomination, we've just seen the boy can make mistakes. So what can we think? First, regarding what will happen at the end of the book, and supposing Snape is a traitor, we can say that he starts showing his ingratitude towards Dumbledore. He seems to consider that the job is his due, and he doesn't stand up as a mark of deference towards the Headmaster. He remains on his chair, like a Prince on his throne. We can compare this reaction with Harry's, when Tonks heals his broken nose: he thanks her several times. Snape doesn't look very grateful. We can also drive another parallel between him and young Voldemort in chapter 17: the boy is described as "relaxed", with his hand laying "negligently upon the arm of his chair". Young Voldemort is sitting in Slughorn's office as if he were the actual master of the place. Snape doesn't even stand up when his Headmaster says his name, as if he were more important than him. It's like a little act of insubordination, and we know where it will lead him. But on another hand, there's what we know concerning the DADA class. Did Snape take the job because it was so dangerous nobody else could do it? In that case, it could be a kind of self-sacrifice. Is it one of the reasons why he shouts "don't call me a coward" in chapter 28? But in that case, why does JK Rowling say that he has "achieved his heart's desire"? Why does she use this key expression? Why should it be an achievement, if the job is jinxed? He's he trying to pay for what he did when he was a Death Eater? Later, we'll learn that the author of the jinx is Voldemort himself. Shall we imagine that the Dark Lord has broken the curse, now that his dear Snape is DADA teacher? So, is the author telling us that Snape, because he has achieved his heart's desire, is truly a traitor? Or does she mean that he has been waiting all this time for the moment he would make that terrible sacrifice? Another time, we can only ask questions. 15. How do you feel about Harry's savage comment that at least it means Snape will be gone by the end of the year? Did Harry's comment about keeping his fingers crossed for another death disturb you? I found Harry was rough, but it didn't disturb me, because it's JK Rowling's book, and I don't have to say she's better write it this way or another. And I think she has done a great job with Harry's "shocking declaration". What Harry says is an example of what literature calls "tragic irony". Harry calls for death to come, because he wants to get rid of Snape. He also announces what is going to happen by the end of the book. Snape won't be there any more, but the price to pay will be Dumbledore's death and Harry's definitive separation from the rest of the Wizarding World. Harry's wish will turn against him. The same thing happens in several Greek tragedies, for example, in "Oedipus King", by Sophocles. The way JK Rowling writes Harry's story reminds of classic tragedy. Notice also that Harry mentions Quirrell, who was Voldemort's servant, he who had the Dark Lord in his head, he who betrayed Dumbledore though the Headmaster had chosen him as a protector for the Stone. The other interesting thing is Harry's blindness when he wishes someone will die. If it is his heart's desire, then it's very disturbing for the reader, because it sounds like what Voldemort himself would say in the same situation. Moreover, whishing someone will die is the first thing a wizard has to do in order to create a Horcrux. The frontier between Harry and the Dark Lord, at that moment of the story, is very narrow. But it's often the case between good and evil. It prefigures the encounter with the Half-Blood Prince and the use Harry will make of his book. There are very good things in that book, but also terrible ones. There are spells you shouldn't try before knowing what they can do. The same way, there are wishes you shouldn't make, and you shouldn't call for death to come, because sometimes it turns against you. Call it superstition if you will, but remember what a Horcrux does to its creator. Remember too that Harry pronounces that shocking wish because he is furious and full of hatred towards Snape, the man he considers as responsible for Sirius's death. It is as if he had even forgotten what it is like when somebody dies. He forgot his own disarray when death took Sirius. Now, it's more or less "an eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth". Hatred blinded his heart, just like it did with Voldemort. He really needs to learn more about compassion, forgiveness, and to separate from his heart what could corrupt it, like hatred. But by the end of the book, when he faces Snape just after Dumbledore's death, Harry doesn't try to kill him, though he hates him He also worries about Draco. The path is hard, there is much temptation, and sometimes Harry falls. But he always gets up, thanks to his ability to love, to feel compassion, and that's all the difference between him and Voldemort 17. When Harry tells Ron about the things he overheard Draco saying on the train, we see more doubt on the part of Harry's circle about his suspicions of Draco. Why doesn't Ron believe that Draco is up to anything? Simply because they are not on the same level. Ron is a good, loyal boy. Harry is the Chosen One, and that makes a huge difference. Well, I'd better stop before it becomes a too long post. Thanks for reading it, and thanks again to Sherry for the good job. Amicalement, Iris From heos at virgilio.it Sat Jan 21 19:10:56 2006 From: heos at virgilio.it (chrusotoxos) Date: Sat, 21 Jan 2006 19:10:56 -0000 Subject: Magic Horcruxes Megastore? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146807 Hi everyone! I'm trying like mad to figure out what will happen in number 7 (and also trying hard no to think about it, so that I can be even more surprised) and I have an hypotesis about the horcruxes. Harry still has to find 4 of them, right? Supposing you horrid people (I hand't thought about that locket, grgrgrrrg, a good surprise gone...but can't keep out of this group :D) are right, I don't think that Kreacher has the locket, I think it still is in that room, where they saying they were throwing everything away? Surely you can't just put dark artifacts into the dustbins, and I'm sure I'd remember a mention on special bins (glass - paper - dark magic)...but what about the other three? Let's figure it out: HRH go to Bill's wedding, and somehow Hermione remembers about the locket, they go right to the Black House and get it. Then we have three, and I don't like a literary strategy consisting in moving the characters around all the time (the Burrow, Black House, Godric's Hollow, Hogwarts - Harry will talk with DD's portrait, won't he? - Magic Place 1, Magic Place 2, Magic Place 3 and Final Place of Terrific Duel with Darkest Overlord)...sounds ridiculous to me. Therefore (almost finished): one of them is in Godric's Hollow, and the last one, being Nagini, is in the same place of the duel. Question: where is the third one? The Burrow? How will they find it? Will Malfoy help them? I like this idea, but of course Lucius had already one Horcrux in his Manor. That cave was an un-HPish thing. I need an Horcux' hideplace we have seen before or we know about, that's how normally things work in HP, please post your ideas... My vote is: the Burrow. I'll do a poll when this is finished :D chrus From crystal_of_ravenclaw at yahoo.com Sat Jan 21 16:15:36 2006 From: crystal_of_ravenclaw at yahoo.com (Crystal Williams) Date: Sat, 21 Jan 2006 08:15:36 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Dementors In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20060121161536.51052.qmail@web37006.mail.mud.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 146808 Andie: POA Harry drives the dementors away before Snape arrives & takes him & Sirius to the castle. In HBP Harry is working on an essay for Snape on the best way to tackle dementors but he knows that he will receive a low mark because he didn't agree with Snape's way of doing it. pg 448 US. Is there a difference in how a Dark wizard communicates with dementors? Crystal: Now that I think of it JKR never has mentioned it about Snape and dementors and I think that Snape as a Dark wizard communicates with dementor differently since he is with Voldemort and so are the dementors. --------------------------------- Yahoo! Photos Got holiday prints? See all the ways to get quality prints in your hands ASAP. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From crystal_of_ravenclaw at yahoo.com Sat Jan 21 16:23:19 2006 From: crystal_of_ravenclaw at yahoo.com (Crystal Williams) Date: Sat, 21 Jan 2006 08:23:19 -0800 (PST) Subject: Poison In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20060121162319.55323.qmail@web37006.mail.mud.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 146809 Andie: Draco tells DD, "I got the idea of poisoning the mead from the Mudblood Granger as well. I heard her talking in the library about Filch not recognizing potions." pg 589 US Pg 307, Harry & Hermione are in the library: "--so it would be down to Filch to realize it wasn't a cough potion, and he's not a very good wizard, I doubt he can tell on potion from --" Hermione stopped dead: Harry had heard it too. somebody had moved close behind them among the dark bookshelves. they waited, and a moment later the vulturelike countenance of Madam Pince appeared... Who was actually listening in? Madam Pince was behind them listening. Draco isn't mentioned. Not that that matters but H & H were whispering. They should have noticed if anyone else was around. How did Draco overhear their conversation? Crystal: I'm thinking that Draco was probably who they heard but Madam Pince was there also. He was probably behind another bookshelf or something and it's not as if they checked really good to see if anyone was listening or not. Draco could have left before anyone noticed he was there. Either that he could have gotten his hands on some Extendable Ears... which to me is doubtful but is a possibility. From mudblood68 at yahoo.de Sat Jan 21 17:24:47 2006 From: mudblood68 at yahoo.de (Claudia) Date: Sat, 21 Jan 2006 17:24:47 -0000 Subject: Book 1 Questions -- wands, Neville In-Reply-To: <43D1A12D.000004.04952@D33LDD51> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146810 Donna: > Mr. Ollivander states, "...you will never get such good > results with another wizard's wand." And, twice he states that > the wand chooses the wizard. (US version, SS, Ch 5) > > Neville was using his father's wand because it WAS his > fathers -sentimental value. Claudia: I was wondering if Neville's clumsiness was partly due to the fact that he had to use a wand that wasn't really HIS. From juli17 at aol.com Sat Jan 21 19:54:24 2006 From: juli17 at aol.com (juli17 at aol.com) Date: Sat, 21 Jan 2006 14:54:24 -0500 Subject: Draco In-Reply-To: <1137836606.1067.56166.m19@yahoogroups.com> References: <1137836606.1067.56166.m19@yahoogroups.com> Message-ID: <8C7ECDB9D3A3491-50C-110F@FWM-M01.sysops.aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 146811 Quick_Silver wrote: There seems to be a view in fandom that Draco is somehow in really big trouble with Voldemort and that his life is going to be in danger. Everyone, including Draco's own mother, didn't think that he'd be able to complete his task yet Draco basically did complete it. He got a group of Death Eaters into Hogwarts and managed to get Dumbledore at the mercy of his wand. These are hardly insufficient tasks that Draco completed in the service of the Dark side. Voldemort may have wanted Draco to fail so that he could punish Lucius but instead Draco did something even better...he eliminated Dumbledore (or caused the situation that led to Dumbledore's death). Even the loss of Snape as a spy isn't that big deal...it not like we've really seen or heard Snape do anything for the Dark side (until the situation that Draco brought about forced him to kill Dumbledore). What's more Snape was at Hogwarts to spy on Dumbledore so if Draco had killed Dumbledore Snape would still be useless. I could be completely wrong and Draco could be in huge trouble from Voldemort but IMO there's just as likely a chance that we'll see Voldemort pinning medals on Draco's and Snape's chests in book 7 for a job while done. Julie: I also don't see Snape and Draco hiding out in Book 7. If we assume DDM!Snape, then part of the reason Dumbledore gave Snape the DADA position was that he knew it would be Snape's last year at Hogwarts--i.e., it was time for Snape to solidify his position with Voldemort and the DEs. If that was the case, then it would make no sense for Snape to be on the run. The whole point was to get him closer to Voldemort. Since Voldemort expected Snape to complete the task for Draco (per Snape) then Voldy shouldn't hold it against Snape. It is possible Snape will put Draco in hiding, should Draco's life be in danger for not completing the task, but again Voldemort expected this, and probably will feel he can still make use of Draco. If Draco is punished, it probably won't be by his death, but by being Crucioed for a while, or some punishment to one of his parents. What I'm eager to find out is how Snape will help Draco stay alive while not getting sucked into true DE activities, while maintaining his *own* cover. And if he will share his real goals with Draco (i.e. make Draco a DDM man also). Can he or will he trust Draco that far? And would Draco be willng to switch sides if it means going against his father? Both Snape and Draco have hard choices to make, and no doubt a price to pay if and when they choose what's right over what's easy. Poor Snape! Poor Draco! Julie [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From fuzz876i at yahoo.com Sat Jan 21 17:45:29 2006 From: fuzz876i at yahoo.com (fuzz876i) Date: Sat, 21 Jan 2006 17:45:29 -0000 Subject: Harry's protection at the Dursleys' - how long must he stay? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146812 Jen: > I was writing about the protection, whether Harry needs to stay > until his birthday for the protection to continue. From what > Dumbledore said (quoted above) and the fact Harry left Privet > Dr. after two weeks in HBP, it doesn't seem there's a set length > of time he must stay for the protection to be activated. The > activation trigger seems to be Petunia--will she allow him > houseroom one more time? > > tropicwhale: > > I guess he'll be picked up by Ron and Hermione his 17 birthday > > to start searching for the horcruxes, after Fleur and Bill's > > wedding, of course. > > Jen: Ron said they'll be going with Harry to Privet Dr. That > could change, but I'm hoping to see the Dursleys dealing with > two extra magical people in the house. fuzz876i: Whether he has to stay until he is 17 or not is not the issue -- the issue is the protection. By allowing Harry to return once more seals the protection that was set when he was a year old he is protected by his mother's blood which is now only in him and his Aunt Petunia. In my opinion he only has to be ther a short while for this protction to be in affect. As for Ron and Hermione staying with Harry at Privet Drive they both know some pretty good spells and are of legal age so they can do some damage to Uncle Vernon if he does not allow them to stay. So therefore by going back just once more to seal the protection he is able to enter manhood in the wizarding world without the degredation of the Dursleys. That raises another question will the Dursleys even let him leave? From fuzz876i at yahoo.com Sat Jan 21 17:58:01 2006 From: fuzz876i at yahoo.com (fuzz876i) Date: Sat, 21 Jan 2006 17:58:01 -0000 Subject: Draco - his task, redeemable? (Re: The GoF Train Scene (was:Re: Humanity, Kant, Caricatures, and Draco)) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146813 > Quick_Silver: > > Everyone, including Draco's own mother, didn't think > > that he'd be able to complete his task yet Draco basically > > did complete it. He got a group of Death Eaters into Hogwarts > > and managed to get Dumbledore at the mercy of his wand. These > > are hardly insufficient tasks that Draco completed in the > > service of the Dark side. > Geoff: > Snape - for whatever motive - completed Draco's task as > he had promised Narcissa at Spinner's End. > > I have on more than one occasion said that I do not believe > that Draco is irredeemable. That, by the way, does not mean > that I necessarily think he /will/ be redeemed because if a > person refuses to hear or see what is to be done for redemption, > then ultimately they reach a point of being unable to see or > hear anything. > > Anyone, however wicked, has an opportunity to be redeemed. I do not think that what Draco did was done by choice and therefore showed that he, like others influenced by evil, or in this case forced by evil under threat of life or death, can do the impossible. Snape knew the chance that Draco would fail was high and that is why he said that Voldemort intended him to do it in the end. This chapter also gave us an insight that Snape was playing both sides of the fence. When Malfoy had Dumbledore at his mercy on the astronomy tower the death eaters that were there cheered for Malfoy to end it. Before their arrival on the tower roof Dumbledore tried to persuade Malfoy to turn to the right side and no one would have to die he offered the OOP help in protecting him and his parents which Malfoy declined. Malfoy had made up his mind to continue with the evil plan and let Snape kill Dumbledore; he chose the evil over the good and is not redeemable. Fuzz876i From horridporrid03 at yahoo.com Sat Jan 21 20:41:38 2006 From: horridporrid03 at yahoo.com (horridporrid03) Date: Sat, 21 Jan 2006 20:41:38 -0000 Subject: The GoF Train Scene - and beyond (was:Re: Humanity, Kant, Caricatures, and Draco In-Reply-To: <007d01c61e20$bbb92e60$c086400c@Spot> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146814 > >>Magpie: > > It seems now that JKR finds the difference between talking the > talk and walking the walk significant, and considers a kid's > potential fall into real evil a dramatic story. Dumbledore spends > most of his last scene overseeing this choice. I don't know where > this will go in the next book, but Draco's actual character when > and if he actually discovers it seems like it could tip a scale or > two. Betsy Hp: I think Draco will have a huge part to play in the final book. He's not the first peer wizard Harry ever met for nothing . And HBP was practically Draco's book. Everyone who's usually so interested in Harry (Dumbledore, Snape, Voldemort) have turned their attentions on Draco. Draco is now the one sneaking around Hogwarts, carrying a bigger burden than schoolwork. And it's Harry trying to figure out what Draco's up to, and playing catch-up to Draco's discoveries. What's really interesting, is that Harry is being forced to confront some of his cherished beliefs. All Slytherins are evil, etc. > >>Magpie: > > I wouldn't be surprised to see Harry remind Draco of Dumbledore's > words in the next book, and for Harry's witnessing that scene to > be important. Betsy Hp: Frankly, I'd be shocked if it wasn't important. I'm betting that it'll be crucial for Harry and Draco to work together at some point. It will give meaning to the Sorting Hat's song and represent the healing of past generations mistakes (as Magpie mentioned in a part of her post I've snipped). Plus, Draco has always been a source of information throughout the books. So I'm betting he'll have some ideas of horcrux hiding places, even if he doesn't know that he knows. > >>Betsy Hp: > > And I think Draco marching into the Gryffindor compartment and > spitting his defiance right into the lion's eye, as it were, was > his best attempt at regaining his balance. > >>Alla: > You make it sound as if Draco committed some heroic action, which > makes me very confused. > Betsy Hp: I was thinking of this scene from Draco's point of view, and I imagine Draco saw himself as being quite heroic, bravely stating the truth to Harry, etc., etc. Actually, it's interesting that he doesn't include Harry in his prediction of doom. It's Hermione and Ron who will die in their battle against Voldemort. Harry has only made a mistake in choosing sides. Draco must not realize that Harry is Voldemort's true target. > >>Alla: > Defiance implies defying of someone who started bothering Draco > first, IMO anyway. Maybe it is again semantics. Does defiance has > another definition except "willingness to resist"? Who was > bothering Draco first? Besides, he did not even come ALONE. I > would have probably bought into his confusion more if he did. > But, no, with all his emotional shake-up, he did not forget to take > his goons with him. I wonder whether he expected to find Harry > alone and start throwing hexes at him? > Betsy Hp: Draco knew Harry would have *his* goons with him. He'd listened to part of their conversation, so he knew who was there. And if Draco had meant to throw some hexes, I'd imagine he'd have had his wand drawn. As to defiance, I mean that Draco is standing up to Harry's side. And he's sticking to his side despite Dumbledore's speech. The term defiance doesn't make any sort of call on who started what. It just means standing against someone or something. Which Draco is very openly doing. I did choose that word because it's more positive than negative, and again, I was coming at the scene from Draco's point of view. > >>Alla: > I think issuing any kind of challenges to Draco was the last thing > on Harry's mind before Draco showed up and started provoking him. Betsy Hp: I agree. Harry, if he had his druthers, would ignore Draco completely. Draco is the one constantly calling Harry's attention to himself. Until HBP, that is. Betsy Hp From willsonkmom at msn.com Sat Jan 21 21:02:28 2006 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Sat, 21 Jan 2006 21:02:28 -0000 Subject: Draco - his task, redeemable? (Re: The GoF Train Scene (was:Re: Humanity, Kant, Caricatures, and Draco)) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146815 Fuzz876i wrote: > > When Malfoy had Dumbledore at his mercy on the astronomy tower > the death eaters that were there cheered for Malfoy to end it. > Before their arrival on the tower roof Dumbledore tried to > persuade Malfoy to turn to the right side and no one would have > to die he offered the OOP help in protecting him and his parents > which Malfoy declined. Malfoy had made up his mind to continue > with the evil plan and let Snape kill Dumbledore; he chose the > evil over the good and is not redeemable. > Potioncat: I didn't read it that way at all. DD's offer was unexpected, and a whole new idea. At first he showed disdain but did seem to be thinking about it, and he had lowered his wand. Before we could see what he would choose, matters were taken out of his hands. JKR says he would not have killed DD. I think he is still redeemable. From horridporrid03 at yahoo.com Sat Jan 21 21:04:00 2006 From: horridporrid03 at yahoo.com (horridporrid03) Date: Sat, 21 Jan 2006 21:04:00 -0000 Subject: Draco and Snape, what now? (wasThe GoF Train Scene - and beyond ( In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146816 > >>Annemehr: > > I'm pulling for Draco, and I have been for pretty much the whole > > series. In fact, my main beef against Snape has always been, > > not how he treated Harry or Neville (obviously, they'll be > > fine), but how he treated Draco, this boy in his house who's > > been raised by a Death Eater and whose complete ease in Snape's > > presence suggested that Snape had never challenged Draco's world > > view in any way. > > > >>Potioncat: > I'm trying to catch up here, and although this post generated many > replies and the thread itself is weaving all over the place, I > haven't seen this part of Anne's post followed up. > I agree. Snape's treatment of all those in his House is just as > bad, even worse, than the way the Dursleys raised Dudley. Although > we don't know what may have happened off page, Snape never seemed > to correct Draco's behavior, nor model better behavior. > Betsy Hp: But how can you judge Snape's actions if you don't know what his actions have been? We do know that Draco was never recruited into the Death Eaters until Voldemort wanted to punish Lucius. We also know that Snape spoke against the idea. And we've not seen any Death Eaters young enough to have been Snape's students. On the flip side, I can't see how Snape *could* overtly speak out against Voldemort, not without blowing his cover. I can't imagine Draco not talking over any such conversations with his father. Plus, I think it's very important that Draco trust and like Snape. If Draco sees Snape as someone he can look up to, it gives Snape more pull when he either reveals himself as DDM or speaks against Voldemort. > >>Potioncat: > It was of great importance to DD that Draco be saved from himself, > I can't imagine that Snape would abandon that mission. Betsy Hp: Something I think JKR did a bang up job of in HBP was to show how protective Snape is of Draco. I got the impression that the Unbreakable Vow really wasn't necessary to get Snape to look after the boy. That scene where Snape heals Draco's wounds has Snape acting practically maternal. And when Snape takes Draco from the tower at the end of the book, he seemed *very* protective. As long as Draco remains with Snape, I think he'll be as safe as possible. Betsy Hp From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Sat Jan 21 21:53:00 2006 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Sat, 21 Jan 2006 21:53:00 -0000 Subject: The GoF Train Scene - and beyond (was:Re: Humanity, Kant, Caricatures, and Draco In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146817 > >>Alla: > > You make it sound as if Draco committed some heroic action, which > > makes me very confused. > > > > Betsy Hp: > I was thinking of this scene from Draco's point of view, and I > imagine Draco saw himself as being quite heroic, bravely stating the > truth to Harry, etc., etc. Alla: Oh, that very well could be - Draco seeing himself as a Hero, I mean. I am just not sure how I as a reader could share Draco's dellusions about him being a hero. It all goes back to the idea that IMO sides ( Light and Dark) are drawn very clearly in Potterverse. People can change and change sides, but if they think that they are right being on Voldemort's side, JKR IMO does not show it. Betsy Hp: Actually, it's interesting that he > doesn't include Harry in his prediction of doom. It's Hermione and > Ron who will die in their battle against Voldemort. Harry has only > made a mistake in choosing sides. Draco must not realize that Harry > is Voldemort's true target. Alla: So, besides being delusional, Draco is also somewhat ignorant about Harry being Voldemort true target ( I am not sure about the extent of his ignorance, but that is a possibility of course). I am not sure what is so interesting. Draco only threatens Ron and Hermione and makes disgusting comment about Cedric. Nothing especially interesting to me except Draco getting his just desserts for this scene at the end . > Betsy Hp: > Draco knew Harry would have *his* goons with him. He'd listened to > part of their conversation, so he knew who was there. Alla: He SAW that Harry was not alone when he showed up, so he brought Crabbe and Goyle with him without knowing who was in Harry's compartment. Are you saying that Draco heard their conversation before he showed up uninvited in their compartment? It does not really matter much to me, since one way or another, Draco had no business in Gryffs compartment IMO, but I am curious, I flipped the relevant pages, but could not find Draco sitting in the nearby compartment. Could you refer me to the quote, please? Betsy Hp: And if Draco > had meant to throw some hexes, I'd imagine he'd have had his wand > drawn. Alla: Not necessarily, that is often Draco's pattern - insult first, draw the wand later - as in ferret scene. In any event, I was just speculating about it, whether Draco meant to throw hexes or not, I find his words to be enough of cruel provocation. But yes, I think it is a reasonable speculation to make that he wanted a fight. Betsy Hp: > As to defiance, I mean that Draco is standing up to Harry's side. > And he's sticking to his side despite Dumbledore's speech. The term > defiance doesn't make any sort of call on who started what. It just > means standing against someone or something. Which Draco is very > openly doing. I did choose that word because it's more positive > than negative, and again, I was coming at the scene from Draco's > point of view. Alla: So, "defiance" DOES have positive connotations, correct? If you were simply speculating about Draco imagining himself a hero, that I understand, as I said above. I just don't buy that Rowling agrees with Draco at all on that issue. I would imagine that Voldemort and DE also view themselves as defiantly standing to Dumbledore's side. IMO of course. > > >>Alla: > > I think issuing any kind of challenges to Draco was the last thing > > on Harry's mind before Draco showed up and started provoking him. > > Betsy Hp: > I agree. Harry, if he had his druthers, would ignore Draco > completely. Draco is the one constantly calling Harry's attention > to himself. Until HBP, that is. Alla: Well, of course, Draco would not want Harry paying attention to him preparing the assassination of the Headmaster. JMO, From babyhrndz at yahoo.com Sat Jan 21 21:06:15 2006 From: babyhrndz at yahoo.com (Amanda Shoffner) Date: Sat, 21 Jan 2006 13:06:15 -0800 (PST) Subject: How did he know? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20060121210615.20732.qmail@web30811.mail.mud.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 146818 Adi wrote: I was wondering about how Voldemort could have found about the spell to make horcruxes eventhough it is supposed to be such a secret and unmentionable subject. He found it even while he was at Hogwarts, so how could a teen, no matter how talented, find such a thing without arousing the interest of Dumbledore who was, as he says, has been watching Tom Riddle, all the time,during his school days? Amanda: I thought of this too, but then I remembered that Tom Riddle had 'followers' at that time as well, even DD remembers them and they became the DEs. TR(LV) could have sent them on to look. IMO, it was LMalfoy. He did have the diary (CoS), even though he did not know entirely what it was, he knew it existed and would do some damage. ~Amanda From babyhrndz at yahoo.com Sat Jan 21 21:09:38 2006 From: babyhrndz at yahoo.com (Amanda Shoffner) Date: Sat, 21 Jan 2006 13:09:38 -0800 (PST) Subject: Locket at Grimmauld Place In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20060121210938.39159.qmail@web30803.mail.mud.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 146819 Witherwing wrote: What if Regulus was able to round up more than one horcrux before he died/ disappeared? It would make Harry's job a bit easier, providied Mundungus didn't pilfer and sell them off. Harry may be the proud owner of more than one horcrux! That house was full of dark objects... Amanda: When I think of Regulus, for some odd reason I keep thinking of the 'empty' picture in the room HP stayed w/ RW at Grimmauld Place that keeps laughing. I have this idea that it is Regulus' picture and we will be hearing from him in book 7. Again, IMO. ~Amanda From stevejjen at earthlink.net Sat Jan 21 22:05:18 2006 From: stevejjen at earthlink.net (Jen Reese) Date: Sat, 21 Jan 2006 22:05:18 -0000 Subject: ESE!Lupin condensed In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146820 Neri: > Finally, I think the main problem with ESE!Lupin is that, as a > shattering end-of-the-series-that-is-only-one-book-away > revelation, it doesn't explains any of what I consider to be > the "official" big mysteries that must to be solved in the HP > saga. Jen: Not to mention Harry's hatred would shift to Lupin, collapsing the carefully planned animosity between Harry and Snape like a house of cards. And the simple fact Lupin would appear capable of planning and executing spectacular feats while Voldemort stands in his shadow, wallowing in villainous mediocrity. More than that, though, is the issue of overshadowing Godric's Hollow and the events surrounding it. Neri mentioned some of the crucial mysteries to be resolved: > Like why did Snape change sides and why did Dumbledore trust > him? How did Harry get Voldy's powers and a direct link into his > mind? What was the gleam in Dumbledore's eyes about? What really > happened with the UV/ on the tower? Where are the Horcruxes > hidden? How is Harry going to kill Voldemort? Jen: From the Prank until the Potters died, or perhaps the Longbottom torture depending on how convoluted the story is, there are huge gaps of missing information. The way I see it this time frame will be the true denoument of the story, dropped in amidst the ongoing horcrux search by means of the Pensieve, personal accounts and possibly time travel. The night at Godric's Hollow has been so shrouded in secrecy and JKR flat out refused to answer any questions related to it in the last interview. All we have are little dribbles of information from Voldemort, Harry's dementor memories and Dumbledore's info about the prophecy and ancient magic. There are so many events within this time frame JKR plans to give us more information about according to her interviews: *Prank *James and Lily's work *More on Lily, 'very important in what Harry ends up having to do' *Harry's christening *How many people know about the prophecy and who they are *Who else, if anyone, was at Godric's Hollow *The passing of Voldemort's powers into Harry, what are they and how it happened Not to mention fan speculation about events which fall during this time period: *James becoming head boy & whether it's tied to the Prank or something else *Snape's turn to Voldemort *Regulus' death *Lupin's absence from the Marauders, if significant *LV offering Lily a chance to step aside, if significant *Why the DE's went after the Longbottoms specifically if they didn't know about the prophecy I'm sure there are other events I'm not remembering. No offense to Pippin here because ESE!Lupin is probably the most well-thought out and clever theory around, but I'm hoping for something even bigger as the huge denoument of the series. Something which ties togther all these fragmented parts into a believeable whole, so when Harry faces Voldemort in the final battle he truly will know 'everything' he needs to know to defeat him. I'm satisfied Dumbledore told Harry everything he knew to be a fact before he died (except why he trusted Snape), and what's left will come to Harry by other means during the search for the horcruxes. I'm personally expecting Lupin to play a big part in Book 7, perhaps even accompanying Harry to Godric's Hollow. I think he'll finally step up to the plate in this one, in the opposite way Pippin proposes. Jen R. From quick_silver71 at yahoo.ca Sat Jan 21 22:15:01 2006 From: quick_silver71 at yahoo.ca (quick_silver71) Date: Sat, 21 Jan 2006 22:15:01 -0000 Subject: Draco (Re: The GoF Train Scene (was:Re: Humanity, Kant, Caricatures, and Draco)) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146821 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Geoff Bannister" wrote: > Geoff: > My interpretation of canon goes against your suggested view. > > Looking at the scene at Spinner's End, we see the following clues: > '"That's why he's chosen Draco, isn't it?" she (Narcissa) > persisted. "To punish Lucius?" > "If Draco succeeds," said Snape, still looking away from her, "he > will be honoured above all others." > "But he won't succeed!" sobbed Narcissa. "How can he, when the Dark > Lord himself-?" > Bellatrix gasped; Narcissa seemed to loe her nerve. > "I only meant... that nobody has yet succeeded..."' > (HBP "Spinner's End" p.38 UK edition) > > 'Snape caught hold of her wrists and removed her clutching hands. > Looking down into her tear-stained face, he said slowly, "He intends > me to do it in the end, I think. But he is determined that Draco > should try first. You see, in the unlikely event that Draco succeeds, > I shall be able to remain at Hogwarts a little longer, fulfilling my > useful role as spy." > "In other words, it doesn't matter to him if Draco is killed!" > "The Dark Lord is very angry," repeated Snape quietly. "He failed to > hear the prophecy. You know as well as I do, Narcissa, that he does > not forgive easily." > (ibid. p.39) > > I thikn this, plus the fact that Snape takes the Unbreakable Vow to > protect Draco from harm, suggests that there is cause for concern > regarding Draco. > > Again, Draco himself is fearful for his life: > 'Draco Malfoy was standing with his back to the door, his hands > clutching either side of the sink, his white-blond head bowed. > "Don't," crooned Moaning Myrtle's voice from one of the > cubicles. "Don't... Tell me what's wrong... I can help you..." > "No one can help me," said Malfoy. His whole body was shaking. "I > can't do it... I can't... it won't work... and unless I do it soon... > he says he'll kill me..." > (HBP "Sectumsempra" p.488 UK edition) > > Now this might refer to Malfoy repairing the Vanishing Cabinet and > getting the Death Eaters into the school rather than killing > Dumbledore but Draco is obviously in fear of his life. He is shaking > and crying. > > This hardly suggests that Voldemort will be pinning medals on Draco > since he really only completed half his task. Snape - for whatever > motive - completed Draco's task as he had promised Narcissa at > Spinner's End. > > I have on more than one occasion said that I do not believe that > Draco is irredeemable. That, by the way, does not mean that I > necessarily think he /will/ be redeemed because if a person refuses > to hear or see what is to be done for redemption, then ultimately > they reach a point of being unable to see or hear anything. Again, I > have more than once pointed members to the fate of the dwarves in > C.S.Lewis' "The Last Battle" which chronicles the end of Narnia when > they refuse to believe in the existence of Aslan. > > Anyone, however, wicked has an opportunity to be redeemed. It is in > the very central core of Christianity. When considering Draco, I > sometimes find myself thinking of Saul of Tarsus, before he went to > Damascus. He was a man who had set his mind like flint against the > early Christian church, who rooted out believers and dragged them off > to prison, who consented in the stoning of Stephen, standing by and > holding the coats of those who hurled the rocks. And then, possibly > with the foundation of his enmity being undermined by the way in > which Christians responded to persecution, his meeting with the risen > Christ on the Damascus road completed the rethink. And from this came > St.Paul, possibly the greatest of the early missionaries. > > Of course, much depends on Draco's whereabouts now. If he has been > hauled off to Voldemort, he could well be in extreme danger. On the > other hand, if Snape /is/ Dumbledore's man (and for me the jury has > been out for years on just what to decide about him), he may well > have spirited our young friend off to a safer place - if that exists > in the troubled Wizarding World. > Maybe I was being a little flippant when I said that Snape and Draco would get medals...my bad. But IMO Draco's redemption would more compelling if he had what he always wanted...power, importance on the Dark side, etc...and realized that he was supporting something immoral and that his parents were wrong to support Voldemort. Quick_Silver From Nanagose at aol.com Sat Jan 21 22:23:29 2006 From: Nanagose at aol.com (spotsgal) Date: Sat, 21 Jan 2006 22:23:29 -0000 Subject: ESE!Lupin condensed In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146822 >Pippin: >For the reader, the message is one that anyone who is serious about >defending minority rights has to face. Sometimes those who once were >the best and brightest bring disgrace on themselves and manage to >fulfill the most derogatory stereotypes about their people while >doing it. Christina: But we already have somebody that fills this role - Fenrir Greyback. Even while defending the rights of werewolves to live as other people do, we must face the idea that there really are some werewolves that go around biting other people's children. So it would be superfluous for Lupin to fill this same function. >Pippin: >In the Shack his is the calmest voice, as if, the narrator notes, >Hermione had spotted a problem in an experiment about grindylows. >The most excited he gets is "very tense" and that's when he first >enters. After Pettigrew is transformed, and Lupin sets eyes on this >supposed traitor and murderer, does Lupin display loathing and anger? >Not a bit. His voice is "light and casual", then he speaks "more >coldly" "evenly" and "grimly." As they're about to kill Peter, Black >is shaking, he is described as having "a terrible fury in his face." >Not Lupin. "You should have realized," said Lupin quietly, "if >Voldemort didn't kill you, we would. Good-bye, Peter." Christina: The problem with looking at Lupin's behavior in this way is that Lupin is characteristically an unemotional person. Merely sitting in a chair and covering his face with his hands (in HBP) is such a shocking show of emotion that Harry states that he's never seen Lupin "lose control" before and that the display is almost "indecent" to watch. >Pippin: >He bargained with Voldemort to save Lily, revealing that Peter was >the secret keeper. Christina: Huh? Now, I'm a firm believer that Lily and Lupin were friends (from JKR's comments and the fact that they were prefects together), but if Lupin was going to ask Voldemort to let anybody live, wouldn't it have been James? I am still hard-pressed to believe that Lupin would *ever* betray Dumbledore, but I scratch my head even harder when thinking about why Lupin would betray James and Sirius. He makes it clear at the end of PoA what a profound difference their animagi forms made in his transformations. He says that they made the transformations the "best times of my life." Lupin says that aside from his transformations, being at Hogwarts made him "happier than I had ever been in my life. For the first time ever, I had friends, three great friends." Also, talking about James cheers Lupin up in HBP. I just can't imagine why somebody would choose to betray all of the people that made their lives happy in order to go over to the side of the people that prove all of the negative stereotypes about werewolves that Lupin tries so hard to go against. If Lupin *has* found his adult life unbearable, it's only because, as ESE, he killed or imprisoned all of the people that had ever loved or accepted him! People have differing opinions of whether the series is character- or plot-driven. JKR herself has insisted that it is character-driven. Even if it is mainly plot-driven, the actions of the characters still make sense (it is IC for Harry to rush to the DoM to save Sirius, it is in character for Sirius to rush to the DoM to help Harry, it is IC for Dumbledore to keep the information about the prophecy from Harry). I just can't make heads or tails Lupin's motivations to be ESE here. And as Renee mentioned, I don't see how Lupin could have gotten the Secret Keeper information in the first place. >Pippin: >McGonagall says he wasn't in James and Sirius's class, and she knows >the difference between a weak wizard and one who only lacks >confidence. Christina: As somebody mentioned earlier, I doubt McGonagall would find Neville to be in Harry's "class," but he proves to be much stronger than we think he is. Also, Peter being the spy doesn't require much magical strength or talent. All he has to do is sit back and let his friends give him information, and then give it to the Dark Lord. Peter is always twitchy and nervous, so there's no need for him to act cool and collected as he's passing on information from the Order. >Pippin: >He could not endure the social disadvantages of living as a werewolf, >yet only among his own kind did he feel normal. Christina: I could believe this if not for the fact that Lupin is the least happy, and "thinner and more ragged-looking than ever" when he has had the most contact with his supposed "brethren." The only canon we have about Lupin's feelings of normalcy while transformed are him saying that he felt the least wolfish when transformed not in the company of his fellow werewolves, but in the company of his three best Animagi friends (who you believe that he promptly went and betrayed)! >Pippin: >JKR continues to talk about clues and red herrings, and to drop hints >that things aren't as they seem. It's my guess that the last three >books form a single mystery -- the murder of Sirius Black-- and this >will have to be solved. >Neri: >Finally, I think the main problem with ESE!Lupin is that, as a >shattering end-of-the-series-that-is-only-one-book-away revelation, >it doesn't explains any of what I consider to be the "official" big >mysteries that must to be solved in the HP saga....Instead, ESE!Lupin >mainly "solves" mysteries that are officially already solved, like >who was the spy that betrayed the Potters, and things that were never >even presented as mysteries in the first place, like who killed >Cedric and who killed Sirius. Christina: The big question surrounding ESE!Lupin is: Why? What's the point of ESE!Lupin? Pippin partially answered this by speculating that the grand mystery of the series (the last three books, at least) is the identity of Sirius's murderer. But using Pippin's own words, the books are Harry's story, not Lupin's (or Sirius's). Having a revelation scene in which Lupin confesses being the perpetrator of the evils in *all 6 books* will suck up major page-time, not to mention distract the series from what I think is a much more likely candidate for Grand Mystery - how will Harry defeat Voldemort? This is the question we've been asking ourselves from day one, and everything in the series, from the invisibility cloak to the Weasley twins to the Accio charm to the prophecy to Snape exists for the purpose of aiding or hindering Harry's quest to defeat Voldemort. All of the little side questions (some which we have answers to already) tie into the main one - why didn't Harry die in 1981? Why didn't Voldemort die in 1981? What are the things that Voldemort has done to ensure his immortality? etc, etc. I also find the Evil Overlord nature of ESE!Lupin unsavory. It basically says that one man is behind the vast majority of crimes in the series - betraying the Potters, killing Cedric, framing Sirius, killing Sirius, etc. He's a supervillian! It goes against the way that JKR seems to be trying to show how a wide variety of people can commit evil - Snape gives Voldemort the prophecy, Peter betrays the Potters and kills Cedric, Bellatrix kills Sirius, etc. Having Lupin responsible for all of these things gives him such a status as an evildoer that I fear he could temporarily overshadow even Voldemort! Finally, the highly speculative nature of ESE!Lupin and the extreme lack of canon that suggests that this is a series of events that are likely makes it feel like a very pulled-out-of-the-sky kind of theory. It is based on a series of assumptions that have little or no canon support (Lupin feels more camaraderie with the werewolves than with the Marauders, for one). I firmly believe that you could take any character in the series and, with enough thought, make them ESE in this exact same way. Christina ...hoping that the formatting on this one is square, still wishing Yahoo had a spell-checker From bboyminn at yahoo.com Sat Jan 21 22:23:35 2006 From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Sat, 21 Jan 2006 22:23:35 -0000 Subject: When will the ministry start kicking butt and taking names? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146823 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "fuzz876i" wrote: > > > tropicwhale wrote: > > Probably after all the dust settles, The Ministry are nothing > > but a bunch of ninnies. They are kicking butt and taking names, > > just the wrong ones,... They are just too afraid of the > > Deatheaters to do anything proper, > > fuzz876i: > ... the ministry is going about the arrest of death eaters. The > fact that Stan Shunpike would say and do anything for attention > leads me to believe they made a big mistake with him. They should > have arrested the one they know about -- Fenrir Greyback. He has > been attacking kids for years. What about the ones that escaped > Azkaban prison,....? In my opinion it would be a show of bad > character.... Scrimgeour said that it was better to say three > arrests than three mistaken arrests and releases. > bboyminn: The Ministry is a typical bureaucracy, their number one priority is self-perpetuation. If Voldemort wins they'll grovel and bow and survive; if the good guys win they'll brag and crow and take the credit. Notice the circumstances at the end of OotP. The Escaped Death Eaters were found in the Ministry in the association of often suspected, but got off, Death Eaters. But what happened? The suspected Death Eaters were charged with Tresspassing and attempted theft. No mention of associating with DE's, no mention of them being DE's, no mention fo the tremendous property destruction, no mention of trying to kill several kids, no mention of fighting the Order, nothing made of the appearance of Voldemort apparently in thier aid. In other words, the Ministry didn't want to make waves or cause trouble for prominent citizens, especially rich and generous prominent citizens. Yet just a few weeks later they are arresting people like Stan Shunpike because it puts on a good show. Notice that none of those falsely arrested were by any means rich and generous. So, we clearly have the Ministry doing everything it can to show itself in the best possible light. No one is interested in solving any of the problems or dealing with any of the issues. That would be to messy. That could cause fallout among the rest of the Ministry, among the general citizenry, and among the many rich and generous benefactors. That's to the good of know one, at least, not to the good of anyone of any importance. So, best make a good show and leave it at that. That's typical of all powerful politicians, they are mostly interested in looking good and holding on to power, but they can never sully themselves with such mundane and dangerous things as solving the problems at hand. ...don't get me started... Steve/bboyminn From nrenka at yahoo.com Sat Jan 21 22:47:08 2006 From: nrenka at yahoo.com (nrenka) Date: Sat, 21 Jan 2006 22:47:08 -0000 Subject: ESE!Lupin condensed In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146824 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Jen Reese" wrote: > Jen: Not to mention Harry's hatred would shift to Lupin, collapsing > the carefully planned animosity between Harry and Snape like a > house of cards. I'm not Pippin and she should correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe she's argued that would be one very solid reason *for* ESE!Lupin. It's the reversal yet again as Harry has to learn to deal with difficult reality; the seemingly evil Snape is loyal and the seemingly kind and loyal Lupin is eeeevil. JKR is waiting to spring the trap on us. > And the simple fact Lupin would appear capable of planning > and executing spectacular feats while Voldemort stands in his > shadow, wallowing in villainous mediocrity. There's my objection. Some parts of this theory can be argued for in isolation, and might make good sense. But the whole shebang? If Lupin were that unbelievably competent and lucky, he should be sitting on a tropical island of his choice rolling in dough and having hot waitresses bring him drinks. It remains to be seen how much of the plot JKR loads onto Snape, after all. I wasn't surprised that he turned out to be the eavesdropper--that makes good dramatic sense. But she can't do that much, or things tie up too neatly: Peter being involved helps spread the load amongst more characters. I got the impression that JKR telling us who invented Wolfsbane was more of a "Dear fans, Snape didn't do *everything*, you know" moment than anything else. -Nora continues to attempt advanced necromancy on a hard drive From miles at martinbraeutigam.de Sat Jan 21 20:55:02 2006 From: miles at martinbraeutigam.de (Miles) Date: Sat, 21 Jan 2006 21:55:02 +0100 Subject: Book 1 Questions -- wands References: <43D1A12D.000004.04952@D33LDD51> Message-ID: <018e01c61ecc$f46e7880$14b2a8c0@rechnerchen> No: HPFGUIDX 146825 Donna wrote: > With the wand being extremely important in doing magic, I'm wondering > if it > is wise to intentionally hand down used wands to the children to > learn with. Mr. Ollivander states, "...you will never get such good > results with > another wizard's wand." And, twice he states that the wand chooses > the > wizard. (US version, SS, Ch 5) Miles: IMO, we should see Ollivander's statement as an opinion, not as a matter of fact. It is true, he is a great expert for wands, no doubt. But opinions of experts have a general problem: they tend to overextend the importance of their own expertise. Let me try an analogy - cooking. Ask a cutler - he will say that good knifes are most essential for any cook, and that the knife influences the cooked meal very much. Ask the producer of pots&pans - no doubt that he will highlight the importance of the cookware for any cooking. Ask the grower of olive trees... But if Paul Bocuse would use my pans, my olive oil and my knifes, while I can cook in his kitchen - well, you can imagine what meal you would like more. So, it is quite natural that a wandmaker and dealer for new wands will be very convincing when he is talking about the necessity for any wizard to have a wand for himself. But as far as canon shows us, every wizard can do even advanced magic with a borrowed or inherited wand. Yes, there may be differences in performance - but these differences won't be too important in everyday situations and for the average wizard or witch. Miles From miles at martinbraeutigam.de Sat Jan 21 23:11:43 2006 From: miles at martinbraeutigam.de (Miles) Date: Sun, 22 Jan 2006 00:11:43 +0100 Subject: When will the ministry start kicking butt and taking names? References: Message-ID: <01ba01c61ee0$0bd87300$14b2a8c0@rechnerchen> No: HPFGUIDX 146826 Steve wrote: > That's typical of all powerful politicians, they are mostly interested > in looking good and holding on to power, but they can never sully > themselves with such mundane and dangerous things as solving the > problems at hand. Miles: I agree to your characterisation of typical politicians' behaviour - we all know these politicians, no matter what country we come from. But "all powerful politicians"? No, really, no. Even without naming famous counter-examples like Mahatma Ghandi (yes, he was a very powerful politician even without any office), Shimon Peres or Nelson Mandela - we all know examples of politicians with power/influence who always tried to do the right and necessary things, sometimes at the expense of short time political success. Somehow I do not like JKR's characterisation of the Ministry. Up to now, we didn't see a single "politician" in the WW that really tries to do the right things. All of them we do know are like charicatures of politicians, and the undertone of this is a bit problematic. Most list members will be able to seperate a literal description of a fiction Ministry and its politicians from real life. But if we try to see the message of the HP series, to only have politicians without any responsibility for anything apart from their own reputation may influence the attitude of some readers towards democratic systems in general (even if the WW is not a democratic society - but appears to be). I would like to see a "good" politician in book 7 as much as a good Slytherin (most politicians seem to be Slytherins...) - but stop, we saw Slughorn, so part 2 of my wish is checked off. Miles From quick_silver71 at yahoo.ca Sat Jan 21 23:35:47 2006 From: quick_silver71 at yahoo.ca (quick_silver71) Date: Sat, 21 Jan 2006 23:35:47 -0000 Subject: When will the ministry start kicking butt and taking names? In-Reply-To: <01ba01c61ee0$0bd87300$14b2a8c0@rechnerchen> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146827 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Miles" wrote: > Somehow I do not like JKR's characterisation of the Ministry. Up to now, we > didn't see a single "politician" in the WW that really tries to do the right > things. All of them we do know are like charicatures of politicians, and the > undertone of this is a bit problematic. > Most list members will be able to seperate a literal description of a > fiction Ministry and its politicians from real life. But if we try to see > the message of the HP series, to only have politicians without any > responsibility for anything apart from their own reputation may influence > the attitude of some readers towards democratic systems in general (even if > the WW is not a democratic society - but appears to be). > > I would like to see a "good" politician in book 7 as much as a good > Slytherin (most politicians seem to be Slytherins...) - but stop, we saw > Slughorn, so part 2 of my wish is checked off. > > Miles > Miles I agree with your statement about not liking the characterization Ministry. But I'm not sure that part of that isn't deliberate on the part of JK (aside from taking a shot at politicians). Look at Voldemort's strategy against the Order...he specifically targets members that are often described as "great" or "worthy to be killed by Voldemort himself." Within weeks of being exposed to the wizarding public Voldemort takes out Amelia Bones...the witch that a large number of fans thought was going to become Minister of Magic and was described by Dumbledore as a "great" witch. So part of Voldemort plan is to kill the future/current leaders of the wizarding world it seems...which could be why the wizarding world is "scrapping the bottom of the barrel" with people like Fudge and Umbridge in power. It could also be that the system of checks and balances in the wizarding world has been thrown out by the war with Voldemort. Take Lucius Malfoy as an example...Lucius was able to use his influence, money, power, etc to sway the Ministry and have some presence within it. In another world Lucius would have to compete against people like James Potter, who was also a pure-blood, rich, well liked (unless your name is Snape), etc, for influence within the Ministry. Another example is Frank and Alice Longbottom...they seem to come from a old wizarding line(s), are described as being popular within the wizarding world, and are members of the Order yet by the end of first war they were tortured into madness. So they can't have any influence on the wizarding world now. Quick_Silver From a_svirn at yahoo.com Sun Jan 22 00:10:50 2006 From: a_svirn at yahoo.com (a_svirn) Date: Sun, 22 Jan 2006 00:10:50 -0000 Subject: The GoF Train Scene - and beyond (was:Re: Humanity, Kant, Caricatures, and Draco In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146829 Betsy Hp: > Yes, thank you Magpie. When I say Draco stood for Cedric, I don't > mean he wrapped himself in the Hufflepuff flag and started singing > the Order fight song. All that I'm looking for is a tiny bit of > positive emotion towards Cedric, a sense that Draco would not have > predicted Cedric's death as being Voldemort's opening shot. > a_svirn: But I don't really see what you are driving at when you are making this point. Yes, I suppose Draco wouldn't have figured Cedric as a potential target. It so happened, however, that Cedric was first to be killed. What was Draco's reaction? Deep satisfaction as far as anyone can tell. He was the fist you are to follow. Enemies of the heir beware! > >>a_svirn: > > > > The reverse is also true ? his parents love Draco. Does that make > > Lucius any less of a Death Eater? Or Narcissa any less ruthless? > > > > Betsy Hp: > In a strange way, it does. At least, Narcissa will risk her life > and her family's fortune to safe-guard her son. Sure, she's > absolutely ruthless about it. But it's a ruthlessness born of > compassion. (Ruthlessness is not necessarily an evil trait, nor is > it one unique to Death Eaters or their ilk.) a_svirn: Sure. Death Eaters do not have the monopoly on ruthlessness. Yet it can only be "in a strange way" for ruthlessness to be born of compassion. Ruth-less means `without ruth', which is to say without compassion. Betsy Hp: > If Lucius does love Draco than he'd agree with Narcissa's actions in > defying the Dark Lord to protect their son. Which would make him > less of a Death Eater than Bellatrix who wishes she has children she > can sacrifice to Voldemort, and Barty who eagerly kills his father > and makes a mockery of his mother's sacrifice. a_svirn: And thus we've established that Lucius loyalties are somewhat less clearly defined than his sister-in-law's. Big deal. We know it already. Voldemort knows it already. He's still a murderous Death Eater for all his slippery ways. From horridporrid03 at yahoo.com Sun Jan 22 01:14:44 2006 From: horridporrid03 at yahoo.com (horridporrid03) Date: Sun, 22 Jan 2006 01:14:44 -0000 Subject: Draco and Harry (was:The GoF Train Scene - and beyond...) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146830 > >>Betsy Hp: > > > > Actually, it's interesting that he doesn't include Harry in his > > prediction of doom. It's Hermione and Ron who will die in their > > battle against Voldemort. Harry has only made a mistake in > > choosing sides. Draco must not realize that Harry is > > Voldemort's true target. > >>Alla: > > I am not sure what is so interesting. > Betsy Hp: For me, it's interesting on a couple of different levels. First, Draco really doesn't seem to know anything about Voldemort or Voldemort's goals. He seems to have only a surface grasp of what the Death Eaters are all about. The propaganda rather than the actuality. (Shades of Regulus?) Second, I think Draco is still stung from Harry's rejection of him in PS/SS. And that's especially interesting to me, because I think it is significant that Draco was the only person interested in befriending Harry before knowing that he was *the* Harry Potter. I have this niggling suspicion that Harry and Draco will end up as friends. I feel like JKR's been foreshadowing a future friendship almost from their very first meeting. Betsy Hp From rkdas at charter.net Sun Jan 22 01:53:24 2006 From: rkdas at charter.net (susanbones2003) Date: Sun, 22 Jan 2006 01:53:24 -0000 Subject: When will the ministry start kicking butt and taking names? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146831 --- Miles wrote: SNIPPAGE HERE.... > I would like to see a "good" politician in book 7 as much as a good > > Slytherin (most politicians seem to be Slytherins...) - but stop, > we saw > > Slughorn, so part 2 of my wish is checked off. > > > > Miles Miles, Do you find Slughorn to be "good?" I find him exceptionally dodgy, apparently playing both ends against the middle and not at all an example of Slytherin to be emulated. Do I misunderstand you? Jen D. From katmac at katmac.cncdsl.com Sun Jan 22 02:00:10 2006 From: katmac at katmac.cncdsl.com (lagattalucianese) Date: Sun, 22 Jan 2006 02:00:10 -0000 Subject: Locket in Black house In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146832 > > hamstermap: > I don't remember exactly what they did with it and should probably > go back through but I'm sure that Kreacher must have know what it > was. (I mean it had the Slytherin symbol right on it.) I'm going to > go back through and see what they did with it. > La Gatta Lucianese: It was tossed into the rubbish sack, along with the other odds and ends from the drawing-room cabinets (OotP.6). If it was retrieved by Kreacher, it wasn't in his lair under the boiler when Hermione delivered his Christmas present (OotP.23). From katmac at katmac.cncdsl.com Sun Jan 22 02:13:17 2006 From: katmac at katmac.cncdsl.com (lagattalucianese) Date: Sun, 22 Jan 2006 02:13:17 -0000 Subject: Draco and Snape, what now? (wasThe GoF Train Scene - and beyond ( In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146833 > > Potioncat: > ... > > I agree. Snape's treatment of all those in his House is just as bad, > even worse, than the way the Dursleys raised Dudley. Although we > don't know what may have happened off page, Snape never seemed to > correct Draco's behavior, nor model better behavior. > > Draco has no reason to think Snape is anything but a loyal follower > of LV. And if Snape's role caused some problems protecting Harry at > Hogwarts, protecting Draco will be a major difficulty at Villa de > Voldy. ... > La Gatta Lucianese: In Snape's defense, it must be said that Slytherin House is just crawling with Death Eaters' kids, so allowing Draco to behave like a proper little Death Eater is more or less essential to maintaining Snape's cover. I rather doubt that Snape and Draco will go back to Voldemort. I still fancy the idea of them hiding out at 12 Grimauld Place, which we know is unplottable and also has links to both the Black sisters, Bellatrix and Narcissa, in that it's their family home (and I bet Kreacher would be happy to slip away from Hogwarts to let them in, unless it occurs to Harry to forbid it) and links to Harry, in that he now owns the place, by right of inheritance from Sirius' will. In fact, I wonder if this might be the venue in which Harry makes contact with Snape and starts to work with him, and maybe with Draco, to overthrow Voldemort. Alternatively, Draco might be packed off back to his mother, who might take up Dumbledore's offer and let the Order smuggle the two of them into safe hiding. From celizwh at intergate.com Sun Jan 22 02:43:40 2006 From: celizwh at intergate.com (houyhnhnm102) Date: Sun, 22 Jan 2006 02:43:40 -0000 Subject: Draco and Snape, what now? (wasThe GoF Train Scene - and beyond ( In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146834 La Gatta Lucianese: > I still fancy the idea of them hiding out at 12 > Grimauld Place, [...] and links to Harry, in that he > now owns the place, by right of inheritance from Sirius' > will. In fact, I wonder if this might be the venue in which > Harry makes contact with Snape and starts to work with him, > and maybe with Draco, to overthrow Voldemort. houyhnhnm: Harry will surely go back to Grimauld Place when he remembers the locket. What if he finds it is still protected by the Fidelius charm? Knowing that his risk of death was great, Dumbledore would likely have made some provision to continue the protection of Order headquarters if he should die (if they were still using it, that is). If Snape should turn out to be the secret keeper that might be a big enough discrepant event to change Harry's mind about Snape. (Then Harry may remember the freezing charm that saved him from Fenrir Greyback and recognize it was Snape's voice he heard.) From agdisney at msn.com Sun Jan 22 03:15:45 2006 From: agdisney at msn.com (Andrea Grevera) Date: Sat, 21 Jan 2006 22:15:45 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Locket at Grimmauld Place References: <20060121210938.39159.qmail@web30803.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146835 Witherwing wrote: What if Regulus was able to round up more than one horcrux before he died/ disappeared? It would make Harry's job a bit easier, providied Mundungus didn't pilfer and sell them off. Harry may be the proud owner of more than one horcrux! That house was full of dark objects... Amanda: When I think of Regulus, for some odd reason I keep thinking of the 'empty' picture in the room HP stayed w/ RW at Grimmauld Place that keeps laughing. I have this idea that it is Regulus' picture and we will be hearing from him in book 7. Again, IMO. ~Amanda Andie: If I remember correct, the 'empty' picture frame was for Phineas Black. When Harry heard him in DD office he recognized the voice as the one from the picture frame. Andie Before posting to any list, you MUST read the group's Admin File! http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/files/Admin_Files/HBF_Text__MUST_READ Please use accurate subject headings and snip unnecessary material from posts to which you're replying! Yahoo! Groups Links [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From MadameSSnape at aol.com Sun Jan 22 03:40:44 2006 From: MadameSSnape at aol.com (MadameSSnape at aol.com) Date: Sat, 21 Jan 2006 22:40:44 EST Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: How did he know? Message-ID: <248.598e8ba.310458bc@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 146836 In a message dated 1/21/2006 5:00:21 PM Eastern Standard Time, babyhrndz at yahoo.com writes: Tom Riddle had 'followers' at that time as well, even DD remembers them and they became the DEs. TR(LV) could have sent them on to look. IMO, it was LMalfoy. He did have the diary (CoS), even though he did not know entirely what it was, he knew it existed and would do some damage. ---------------------- Sherrie here: Riddle began looking into the creation of Horcruxes while still at school - some fifty years plus back, as the stories stand. Lucius is established as being 41 in OotP, so 42 in HBP - therefore, he couldn't have assisted Riddle in his initial research. My personal theory is that the question to Slughorn brought the information to the front of Slughorn's mind, when Riddle simply plucked it. Or, if not the spell itself, then the information on where to FIND the spell. Sherrie [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From kchuplis at alltel.net Sun Jan 22 04:23:24 2006 From: kchuplis at alltel.net (Karen) Date: Sat, 21 Jan 2006 22:23:24 -0600 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: When will the ministry start kicking butt and taking names? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146837 On Saturday, January 21, 2006, at 07:53 PM, susanbones2003 wrote: > > > Miles, > Do you find Slughorn to be "good?" > I find him exceptionally dodgy, apparently playing both ends against > the middle and not at all an example of Slytherin to be emulated. Do I > misunderstand you? > Jen D. > > > If there is one character in this series that is clearly OFH! it is Slughorn. He is an extremely uncomfortable person. I do think that for the most part he is too much of a coward to help the dark side, but how much help to the "good" side is debatable. However, for some reason I did feel that the death of DD seemed to change him a bit. I would not be surprised to see him as a bit stronger person in the next book. kchuplis From exodusts at yahoo.com Sun Jan 22 03:20:42 2006 From: exodusts at yahoo.com (exodusts) Date: Sun, 22 Jan 2006 03:20:42 -0000 Subject: "Empty painting " at Grimmauld Place WAS: Re: Locket at Grimmauld Place In-Reply-To: <20060121210938.39159.qmail@web30803.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146838 Amanda Shoffner wrote: > When I think of Regulus, for some odd reason I keep thinking of the 'empty' picture in the room HP stayed w/ RW at Grimmauld Place that keeps laughing. I have this idea that it is Regulus' picture and we will be hearing from him in book 7. Again, IMO. Exodusts: The empty painting is a portrait of Phineas Nigellus Black: "Harry realised immediately where he had heard Phineas's voice before: issuing from the apparently empty frame in his bedroom in Grimmauld Place." OotP, Chapter 22 Exodusts. From foxmoth at qnet.com Sun Jan 22 05:01:36 2006 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Sun, 22 Jan 2006 05:01:36 -0000 Subject: ESE!Lupin condensed and Lupin and Sirius replies In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146839 >Pippin: >For the reader, the message is one that anyone who is serious about >defending minority rights has to face. Sometimes those who once were >the best and brightest bring disgrace on themselves and manage to >fulfill the most derogatory stereotypes about their people while >doing it. Christina: But we already have somebody that fills this role - Fenrir Greyback. Even while defending the rights of werewolves to live as other people do, we must face the idea that there really are some werewolves that go around biting other people's children. So it would be superfluous for Lupin to fill this same function. Pippin: I'm talking about what happens when it looks like a respected person went wrong...OJ Simpson or someone like that. It's not easy to judge a person by their individual choices when you know that unfortunately some people are going to take it as confirming their prejudices about a whole group. Fenrir isn't admired by Dumbledore or Harry, and he isn't caught in a moral quicksand, either. He obviously enjoys what he's doing. The way I see Lupin, he believes because he's a werewolf he wouldn't be forgiven the slightest transgression, so to hide each crime he commits another, and they keep getting worse and worse. > Neri: > First, congratulations for what is arguably the grandest HP conspiracy > theory. I'd say much grander than MAGIC DISHWASHER, which was after > all concerned almost exclusively with the Shrieking Shack night. So > your place in the Safe House is safe forever (or at least until the > Safe House itself is washed into TBAY by Hurricane Jo #7). Pippin: Thank you! I don't think the Safe House is going anywhere -- spies and secret organizations will surely play a major role in Book 7 whether ESE!Lupin itself stands or falls. > > And now to the details: > > > Pippin: > > Lupin was instrumental in the prank, as Snape suspected. > > Neri: > Aside of Snape's suspicion there is about zero evidence for that, and > Snape suspicion is hardly reliable, since he suspected James even more > than he suspected Lupin, and was apparently wrong about it. Pippin: We don't know whether Snape's suspicion of Lupin is reliable or not, since we have no idea what it's based on. Canon has not refuted it, so it stands, IMO. So what if Snape's been wrong about lots of things? Harry's been wrong about lots of things too, but he was still right about Draco. > > > Pippin: > > Needing an alias to hide behind while working undercover with the werewolves, he used the name Wormtail. > > > > Neri: > An amazingly lucky shot for ESE!Lupin, considering the Potters and > Sirius later decided about Peter as the Secret Keeper of their own > volition. Pippin: Yeah, but the bad guys get lucky once in a while. JKR is fair that way. Neri: And despite using the code name "Wormtail" it was not Peter > that Sirius suspected, but Remus. So if I understand correctly, the > sole reason we need the "Wormtail" misdirection is to explain JKR > saying in a chat, *not* in the books themselves, that Wormtail killed > Cedric. I'd much prefer that such a central clue/red-herring would be > given in the books themselves. Pippin: "Wormtail" is used as a red herring in the "Snape's Grudge" chapter of PoA, where Lupin asks Snape if he means Harry got the map from "Mr. Wormtail or one of these people. " Of course Lupin knows Snape is thinking of Lupin or Sirius, not Peter. The theory also explains why JKR introduced Mark Evans, a nobody character with a "common" name after Crouch Jr. had already been outed. It could have been a clue, along with Harry claiming "Roonil Wazlib" as *his* nickname, that she's not finished with that particular plot device. > > > Pippin: > > Lupin found it difficult to gain the werewolves' trust and may have > > compromised himself in order to get it. > > Neri: > Er... I probably missed it, but was there any reason to think Lupin > was involved with the werewolves during VW1 ? Pippin: Since we don't know what Lupin was doing in VW1, I speculate freely. Certainly the groundwork is laid. Renee: Lily telling Lupin about the switch because she does not believe it's him, doesn't work, because the only other possible spy is Peter. If Lupin is innocent, Peter is not. And unless Lily's 100% convinced of Peter's innocence, she'll never consent to making the switch. (And no. Lily being overruled by James is NOT believable.) Pippin: I think it was Lily, and she didn't want to believe that any of her friends were guilty. It might be that she only met with Lupin to let him know that *she* still trusted him, and he, who seems to have some talent as a legilimens, sensed that she was lying about Sirius being secret-keeper and was then able to work out the truth. Peter's disappearance would be a clue. I am not sure what would have caused a falling out between Lupin and the other Marauders, but we don't have the whole story of the prank yet. We do have canon that Lily wasn't filled in on all that went on between the Marauders and Snape. If I'm right and Lupin was involved, a belated suspicion that Lupin had deliberately tried to manipulate Sirius into committing murder would certainly alter things between them. > > > Pippin: > > > > He then pursued Peter, who was also pursued by Sirius. When > > Sirius confronted Peter, Lupin tried to kill Peter but missed, blowing > > open the street and unintentionally killing the Muggles. Peter > > took advantage of the situation and escaped in rat form, leaving > > his amputated finger and bloodied robes behind him. Lupin made > > himself believe that Sirius was a Death Eater and it was his curse that > > must have done the damage. > > > > Neri: > I probably missed this last part too. I can't understand how could > ESE!Lupin convince himself that Sirius was a DE and why is it even needed. Pippin: Goodguy!Lupin theorists have this problem too, though they usually gloss over it by telling themselves that Lupin didn't *really* believe Sirius was a DE. Unfortunately canon doesn't bear them out. Lupin's agony and self-loathing over not telling Dumbledore about Sirius don't make any sense unless Lupin sincerely believed Sirius was guilty. IMO, Lupin wanted to think he wasn't like Voldemort or Fenrir, *he* wouldn't kill needlessly (Cedric hadn't died yet.) He did not want to think he had unintentionally murdered twelve Muggles , so he made up a story to excuse himself, helped by the fact that there were, according to Dumbledore in HBP, excellent reasons to think that Sirius was guilty. He might even have gone so far as to tell himself that the Secret Keeper switch was a bluff, that Sirius *had* been the real secret keeper after all. Hmmm, that would explain why he didn't search for Voldemort at once. What if he'd given Voldemort false information? Bad wolfie! > > > Pippin: . > > With everyone who could identify him as a double agent disposed of, > > Neri: > And today Bella is just fine with that? Pippin: She doesn't suspect she was set up. > > > Pippin: > > Since Quirrell was under suspicion, it was Lupin who met with Hagrid > > at the Hogs Head. He also killed the unicorns. > > > > Neri: > I thought Hagrid said that the unicorns could *not* be killed by a > werewolf? Pippin: He says they're not fast enough. Doubtless he's thinking of werewolves chasing a unicorn and bringing it down, not spellwork. But Lupin, unlike the werewolves on the fringes of the WW, is a fully qualified wizard. > > > Pippin: > > Lupin was instrumental in the Diary plot, knowing, as JKR says on her > > website, that it could have made present day Voldemort stronger. > > > > Neri: My apologies, I missed that part too. Canon? Pippin: http://www.jkrowling.co.uk/textonly/en/faq_view.cfm?id=17 > > > Pippin: > > Lupin spotted Peter's picture in the Daily Prophet and took the > > DADA position. > > Neri: > So you think Lupin knew Peter was alive. And he was *inside* the > castle the whole year, and he had never tried getting rid of Peter > himself? Pippin: Why should he, when Crookshanks had access to Gryffindor Tower and was so eager to do it for him? And then he heard that Scabbers was dead. Mission accomplished. > > > Pippin: > >When he saw Sirius at the Quidditch game, he > > summoned the dementors. > > Neri: > So ESE!Lupin was trying to kill Sirius during PoA. There are so many simpler ways he could have done it. The simplest would be telling the Ministry that Sirius is a Black dog animagus and how he enters the grounds. Pippin: Sirius had been in Azkaban since a day or two after the Potters' deaths. Lupin's knowledge would have to date from before his capture, and that would raise the sticky issue of why he didn't mention it before, during the hunt. Anyway, once Scabbers was (supposedly) dead, he didn't have to worry about Peter and Sirius comparing notes, and disposing of Sirius became less urgent. Neri: . Another way would be to ambush Sirius himself near the Willow, kill him and win the all the glory. Pippin: When did Lupin have an opportunity to do this? Neri: A third way would be to leave Sirius a note in the Shrieking Shack or in the tunnel, writing that he now believes in Sirius' innocence and that they should meet, and ambushing Sirius at the meeting place. Pippin: I wouldn't like to be in Lupin's shoes if Snape got his hands on a note like that! Besides, the theory posits that Lupin thinks at this point that Sirius is guilty and proud of it. Neri: Finally, when Lupin breaks into the Shack, wand at ready, and sees Sirius on the floor without a wand, he should kill him on the spot and *then* take care of Scabbers. Pippin: The map must have shown Sirius colliding with Harry and going past him to seize Pettigrew. Lupin would realize then that Sirius wasn't after Harry. He saw a chance to win his old friend back, provided that Sirius blamed everything on Pettigrew. But he had to make sure. > > > Pippin: > > When he spotted Peter on the Marauder's > > Map, he stole wolfsbane potion from Snape's cauldron and drank it > > before running out to the shack. > > Neri: > He was composed enough to steal the wolfsbane potion after he spotted > Peter on the map, and yet he forgot the Map opened on his desk? And > why didn't he simply ask Snape for a cup? Pippin: Snape must have already been coming with the potion when Lupin saw Sirius seize Pettigrew. Lupin would have seen it on the map. He left the map open deliberately so that Snape would follow him, just as he left Harry's cloak lying on the ground. If he hadn't taken his potion, Dumbledore wouldn't blame him for what the werewolf did. But Snape and his 'satiable curiosity had to be dealt with. If he didn't find Lupin in his office, he'd go looking for him anyway. > > > Pippin: > > > > He then forced Peter to return to Voldemort and cooperate in > > the rebirthing scheme. > > Neri: > Then why didn't he do that himself long before that? > Pippin: Lupin's contaminated flesh wouldn't be a good choice for the potion. I shouldn't think it's been tested with a werewolf servant. > > Pippin: > > It was he, AKA "Wormtail" who killed Cedric. > > > > Neri: > I'm trying to imagine the graveyard scene with ESE!Lupin, and I'm > failing. How was he hiding from Harry? Even if he was wearing an > invisibility cloak, was he making sure Harry shuts his eyes in pain > before each and every move? And why going to so much trouble at all? > Harry wasn't supposed to get out of the graveyard alive. Pippin: It's a dark night, there are loads of tombstones to hide behind, and more than one way for a wizard to avoid being noticed. As Voldemort says, he can't be sure that some of his DE's haven't gone over to Dumbledore. Even if Harry isn't going to be telling Dumbledore what happened that night, someone else might. Lupin is his ace spy, and even with Potter dead, Dumbledore is still to be feared. Harry is going to be ungagged and able to talk, so it's best if he can't blurt out anything Dumbledore isn't supposed to know. > > > Pippin: > > Lupin told Sirius that a record of the prophecy was stored in the > > DoM, mistakenly believing that Dumbledore would share this information > > with Harry. Lupin put Podmore under the Imperius curse and made him > > try to break into the DoM. > > > > When Sirius revealed that he thought Harry knew about the prophecy, > > Lupin had no choice but to kill him. > > Neri: > I know we went over this more than once, but frankly I can't hold it > in my brain, and so I completely fail to understand why ESE!Lupin had > to tell Sirius about the prophecy in the first place and why he had to > kill Sirius later. Incidentally, I think one of the main disadvantages > of ESE!Lupin, as of MAGIC DISHWASHER, is that they're so complicated > you just can't hold them in your brain. Pippin: How long did it take you to get the end of PoA into your brain? People are still confused about it. Lupin wanted Sirius to trust him, and what better way than to share a secret? Besides, we need to explain why Lupin's boggart is really a prophecy orb. > > > Neri: > Just out of perverse curiosity, did ESE!Lupin also imperio Tonks to > fall in love with him? Or did she fell in love with him of her own > volition, and if so did she do that before or after he impriused her? > And are we going to get the saucy details in Book 7 or are we left to > imagine them? Pippin: I don't think he did imperius her to fall in love with him. That's why he feels so guilty about it. And yes, details in Book Seven. > Neri: > Umm... Barty's veritaserum confession took 7 pages in GoF, in addition > to 3 pages of voluntary bragging and 2 pages of Dumbledore's > explanations, to a total of almost one chapter, with some questions > (like Barty's part in the Longbottoms affair) still left unanswered, > and that was after only *one* book. I'd imagine the final confession > of ESE!Lupin would take at least three chapters, smack in the middle > of the Big Climax. As Pip!squeak used to write, I'd recommend a cup of > tea and a biscuit. > Pippin: Are you seriously advancing the convoluted denouements of PoA and GoF as a reason *not* to expect the denouement of HP7 to be complicated? > Neri: > Two problems here. In GoF we are shown no less than three occasions in > which Voldy accuses Peter of disloyalty, and in one of these cases he > also punishes him severely. In two of these cases he doesn't have any > reason to suspect somebody else hears what he says, an in the third > case Harry is a witness, but Voldy doesn't have a reason to think > Harry will ever get away. And yet, Voldy never mentions that Peter > owes Harry his life. Even assuming Voldy doesn't understand the > magical part of the Life Debt, I find it very hard to believe that he > knows what happened and doesn't bring it up against Peter in any of > these three occasions. Pippin: Um, I guess I don't get why Voldemort would think it was disloyal of Peter to be saved. Somehow, this doesn't sound like Voldie to me... "Wormtail, you imbecile, how could you let Potter save you? You should have died, then I wouldn't have to worry about this life debt business, and I could have continued my existence as a powerless wraith in constant agony. Shame on you!" But this does... "No doubt that twinkly old fool thinks that sending me a servant in Harry Potter's debt is going to save his precious darling from me. But I don't think it will. Do you think so, Wormtail? " "N-no, Master" "Good. Of course, if you have forgotten what comes to those who attempt to betray Lord Voldemort, I could remind you. You don't need reminding, do you, Wormtail?" Neri: as a shattering end-of-the-series-that-is-only-one-book-away revelation, it > doesn't explains any of what I consider to be the "official" big > mysteries that must to be solved in the HP saga. Pippin: Erm, aren't you rather glossing over the Snape debate here? Isn't it kind of major to determine whether Snape really betrayed Dumbledore or not? And if he didn't, then someone else ought to be the traitor, and his saga should be at least as involved and compelling as Snape's, or the reader will feel cheated. And since the real traitor didn't kill Dumbledore, he has to have done something equally heinous, preferably a number of things, in a number of books. There's really no one else besides Lupin in a position to do that. People have tried to develop theories for ESE!McGonagall and ESE!Fudge, but they don't have the gravitas of Lupin, and they weren't involved in the early days of the Order or the Prank. The "official" mystery, the one pre-occupying Harry in the middle of the book, seldom turns out to be a big one...for example in CoS, Harry is trying to figure out *who* is opening the Chamber, while, as Dumbledore says, the real mystery is *how*. In GoF, Harry mostly worries about how he's going to survive the three tasks, when in fact his survival is guaranteed, and he should be wondering who is going to such trouble to see that he wins. Dumbledore does not seem to anticipate that Harry will have much trouble identifying and destroying the horcruxes. I don't think he invited Harry along on his last expedition for a nice break from school. I think he hoped that Harry's unique abilities had helped him with the Diary horcrux and would prove equally effective on the others. Neri: > In short, it seems to me you first shot your arrow ("Lupin is Ever So > Evil") and now you are painting a magnificent target around it. Pippin: LOL! It seems to me that JKR painted a magnificent target around Lupin, then handed her readers a bucket of whitewash and watched them go to work! Nora: Some parts of this theory can be argued for in isolation, and might make good sense. But the whole shebang? If Lupin were that unbelievably competent and lucky, he should be sitting on a tropical island of his choice rolling in dough and having hot waitresses bring him drinks. Pippin: The same would have to be said of Traitor!Snape. Nora: It remains to be seen how much of the plot JKR loads onto Snape, after all. Pippin: She doesn't have to burden one character with the whole didactic message either. What's wrong with having Lupin be an ideal teacher but a moral failure, while Snape is the reverse? Pippin thanking you all for your responses and hoping this covers all the main points even if your question wasn't quoted From kchuplis at alltel.net Sun Jan 22 06:42:25 2006 From: kchuplis at alltel.net (Karen) Date: Sun, 22 Jan 2006 00:42:25 -0600 Subject: Snape again In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <3FBE7993-8B12-11DA-8D35-000393B04DDE@alltel.net> No: HPFGUIDX 146840 I just got done reading Book 3 through the shack scene again. I still simply cannot buy ESE!Lupin. However, I certainly appreciate the level of detail that all the ESE!Lupin posts have made me look at upon rereading. One thing really struck me tonight and that is that Snape *is* truly unhinged when it comes to any of the Marauder boys. Sure, he didn't hear the end of things, but he heard the *real* story of what happened when he was tricked and that Sirius was the one to blame. That does not keep him from feeling the same as he always has about Remus. What I see clearly here is that this blinding rage is probably the key weapon that LV used to get to Snape, who was probably a pretty big recruit on the old DE list. And I suspect that this blinding, uninhibited anger at the Marauders is merely the set of people that took the stopper out of his repressed abusive past. The straw that broke the camels back, as it were, for all other emotional baggage he carried (similarly to how Snape has become the unfortunate hate vacuum for Harry over every loss in his life. I mean, effectively, Harry has about the same amount of reason to blame Snape for every loved one he has lost as Snape has for blaming the Marauders for every indignity he ever suffered; LV just thinks everyone owes him because he's a gift to wizard kind.) We know from HBP that Snape is really gifted. We also know from other things that he is gifted on many levels. Legilmens, occulmens, potions....and he was a psyche that was ripe for picking. He's almost like a distorted image of Harry and by dint of that a third version of LV in a way. Both Harry and Snape were raised in abusive environments, which, makes them really pretty quiet and self-effacing, at least publicly. Keep quiet. Keep your ducks in a row. Don't be seen. But whereas Harry is raised in a muggle environment, Snape has the full benefit of the WW and its structure. Different pressures and expectations (from others as well as themselves). For all we know Harry's greatest ambition in life growing up was surviving long enough to get shot of the Dursleys and work at McDonald's or something (but I can imagine him wanting to "show" the Dursleys in some way with what he does with his life), but I can well imagine Snape had set to "be a great wizard and show them all" from an early age; hence his alter ego of The Half Blood Prince. LV simply always "knew" and never doubted he was special and had the biggest jump start of them all. And then there is just the genes we're given. Harry has an innate charm and ingenuousness that Snape simply does not. Snape is socially disfunctional; he has no real natural charm; he is not particularly appealing or attractive in any way. Had Tom Riddle not been charming and handsome, would he have been able to rise as far as fast as he did? It's a key idea we continually return to. We've heard more than once how he could charm the people he needed and we can't get away from the "handsome" descriptor until he is good and snaky. Harry, too, has a good enough self esteem that he knows and is gaining ground in appealing to people. I wish I could remember just where I read it, (I think it has to do with Slughorn? HBP? Help anyone) but at one point Harry is described as having persuaded too many people to be taken in by X's tactics or similar sentiment. Once Harry is introduced to a "normal" environment, he blossoms socially (which is probably accelerated by being a good athlete ). And as well, Harry has the jump on both Snape and Riddle in that he IS imbued with the "golden scar". People just expect great things of him from day one. (As an aside here, I think this holds Harry back the most magically speaking. He never performs as well in class when there is official expectation as he does on the fly when he is really doing and not thinking about doing. Or, when he is focused on the goal, not the task. Which is one way in which not being in school may lead to an acceleration of skills in book 7. I can really not think of anytime after hearing a spell that he didn't manage with difficulty in class that he couldn't call upon pretty handily when he wasn't under "test anxiety" conditions but applying them to a goal - usually survival of himself or others.) It's like looking at three versions of the same situation (though Riddle's wasn't abusive, it certainly wasn't normal to be raised, as he was, in a public orphanage. No real abuse but certainly no real family - just as Harry and Snape) and the way people turn out in different conditions. I can see LV pegging Snape after someone informs him about an exceptional and creative potion and spell maker/finder at Hogwarts. It might even be handy that he isn't a school paragon. And once again, why isn't such an exceptional student more heralded? We don't ever hear anything really stellar about Snape at school. No special awards (Hermione would have spotted something in her hunt for the HBP in old archives), no honorable mentions, no "could have been at the ministry" stories. We don't even know what Snape did after he left school and before he taught at HW. I doubt highly that had he been handsome and charming his skills would have been so unnoticed. So, I think LV charmed Snape. Promised him the things that he never got in school for his talent. I wonder what the story is (and I'm sure we'll find out) but Snape is not an idiot, and he isn't insecure in his abilities and as such the scales might just fall from his eyes more rapidly once the real promises aren't kept. I'm almost tempted to fall for the "Lily as a prize" theory but just don't think Snape is that errr.....lascivious or stupid enough to believe he'd ever get a cooperative Lily, once her hubby and son were killed, especially. Maybe all of you have noticed this and I'm just late on the bandwagon and taking up bandwidth, but it really is interesting. I think we have two levels of triangles going now, Draco, Neville, Harry, Harry, Snape, LV with, of course, Harry acting as a kind of fulcrum. Well, it's a thought anyway. From quick_silver71 at yahoo.ca Sun Jan 22 07:44:48 2006 From: quick_silver71 at yahoo.ca (quick_silver71) Date: Sun, 22 Jan 2006 07:44:48 -0000 Subject: Snape again In-Reply-To: <3FBE7993-8B12-11DA-8D35-000393B04DDE@alltel.net> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146841 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Karen wrote: > One thing really struck me tonight and that is that Snape *is* truly > unhinged when it comes to any of the Marauder boys. Sure, he didn't > hear the end of things, but he heard the *real* story of what happened > when he was tricked and that Sirius was the one to blame. That does not > keep him from feeling the same as he always has about Remus. > > What I see clearly here is that this blinding rage is probably the key > weapon that LV used to get to Snape, who was probably a pretty big > recruit on the old DE list. And I suspect that this blinding, > uninhibited anger at the Marauders is merely the set of people that > took the stopper out of his repressed abusive past. Agreed. The Marauders have an ability to unhinge Snape for some reason. > He's almost like a distorted image of Harry and by dint of that a third > version of LV in a way. Both Harry and Snape were raised in abusive > environments, which, makes them really pretty quiet and self- effacing, > at least publicly. Keep quiet. Keep your ducks in a row. Don't be seen. > But whereas Harry is raised in a muggle environment, Snape has the full > benefit of the WW and its structure. Different pressures and > expectations (from others as well as themselves). For all we know > Harry's greatest ambition in life growing up was surviving long enough > to get shot of the Dursleys and work at McDonald's or something (but I > can imagine him wanting to "show" the Dursleys in some way with what he > does with his life), but I can well imagine Snape had set to "be a > great wizard and show them all" from an early age; hence his alter ego > of The Half Blood Prince. LV simply always "knew" and never doubted he > was special and had the biggest jump start of them all. I agree but think there is one huge difference that separate Tom and Harry from Snape. Both Harry and Tom had no Marauders no James, no Sirius, no Remus, and no Peter. Tom seems to have had no real rival during his time at Hogwarts and the future seem to have dominated Hogwarts during that time culminating in Tom getting away with murder. Harry has/had Draco and although Draco has been a problem to Harry he's never really been much more then a nuisance. > > And then there is just the genes we're given. Harry has an innate charm > and ingenuousness that Snape simply does not. Snape is socially > disfunctional; he has no real natural charm; he is not particularly > appealing or attractive in any way Yet when we see Snape in Spinner's End he certainly doesn't seem all that socially dysfunctional. Snape can clearly mingle with the pure- bloods when he needs to and Narcissa describes him as being Lucius "old friend." > It's like looking at three versions of the same situation (though > Riddle's wasn't abusive, it certainly wasn't normal to be raised, as he > was, in a public orphanage. No real abuse but certainly no real family > - just as Harry and Snape) and the way people turn out in different > conditions. I can see LV pegging Snape after someone informs him about > an exceptional and creative potion and spell maker/finder at Hogwarts. > It might even be handy that he isn't a school paragon. And once again, > why isn't such an exceptional student more heralded? We don't ever hear > anything really stellar about Snape at school. No special awards > (Hermione would have spotted something in her hunt for the HBP in old > archives), no honorable mentions, no "could have been at the ministry" > stories. We don't even know what Snape did after he left school and > before he taught at HW. I doubt highly that had he been handsome and > charming his skills would have been so unnoticed. So, I think LV > charmed Snape. Promised him the things that he never got in school for > his talent. I wonder what the story is (and I'm sure we'll find out) > but Snape is not an idiot, and he isn't insecure in his abilities and > as such the scales might just fall from his eyes more rapidly once the > real promises aren't kept. I'm almost tempted to fall for the "Lily as > a prize" theory but just don't think Snape is that errr.....lascivious > or stupid enough to believe he'd ever get a cooperative Lily, once her > hubby and son were killed, especially. But we've heard nothing of awards for James, the other Marauders, Lily, Dumbledore, Slughorn, McGonagall, and a host of other characters that are charming and/or powerful. If I remember correctly Tom Riddle basically set up getting his award for Special Service to the School and Ron and Harry got there awards by dealing with what Tom Riddle had set up. Snape is a talented wizard, there's no doubt about that, yet he is not the most brilliant student to attend Hogwarts (according to Dumbledore that was Tom Riddle) nor is Snape the undisputed Potions Master of the current generation (it was Damocles Belby that invented Wolfsbane recently according to Lupin). Quick_Silver From AllieS426 at aol.com Sun Jan 22 07:46:27 2006 From: AllieS426 at aol.com (allies426) Date: Sun, 22 Jan 2006 07:46:27 -0000 Subject: Snape again In-Reply-To: <3FBE7993-8B12-11DA-8D35-000393B04DDE@alltel.net> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146842 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Karen wrote: > The straw that > broke the camels back, as it were, for all other emotional baggage he > carried (similarly to how Snape has become the unfortunate hate vacuum > for Harry over every loss in his life. I mean, effectively, Harry has > about the same amount of reason to blame Snape for every loved one he > has lost as Snape has for blaming the Marauders for every indignity he > ever suffered; LV just thinks everyone owes him because he's a gift to > wizard kind.) Allie: I have to object. Snape told Voldemort about the prophecy, causing Voldemort to target the Potters. Potters die. Snape goaded Sirius for inaction for an entire year. He didn't make it clear to Harry that he had understood, "He's got Padfoot!" when Harry thought Voldemort had Sirius. Ministry of Magic debacle ensues, Sirius dies. While not directly Snape's fault, you can see why Harry blames him. Snape cast an Avada Kedavra that Harry believes killed Dumbledore. Dumbledore dies (okay, it's up for debate, but Harry believes it). Harry has a lot more reason to feel that Snape is to blame for the deaths in his life than Snape has to blame the Marauders for all of the problems in his. It may be irrational in some instances, but I definitely think that Harry's feelings are more justified than Snape's. From gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk Sun Jan 22 08:01:11 2006 From: gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk (Geoff Bannister) Date: Sun, 22 Jan 2006 08:01:11 -0000 Subject: Draco - his task, redeemable? (Re: The GoF Train Scene (was:Re: Humanity, Kant, Caricatures, and Draco)) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146843 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "fuzz876i" wrote: > > Geoff: > > Snape - for whatever motive - completed Draco's task as > > he had promised Narcissa at Spinner's End. > > > > I have on more than one occasion said that I do not believe > > that Draco is irredeemable. That, by the way, does not mean > > that I necessarily think he /will/ be redeemed because if a > > person refuses to hear or see what is to be done for redemption, > > then ultimately they reach a point of being unable to see or > > hear anything. > > > > Anyone, however wicked, has an opportunity to be redeemed. Fuzz876i > When Malfoy had Dumbledore at his mercy on the astronomy tower > the death eaters that were there cheered for Malfoy to end it. > Before their arrival on the tower roof Dumbledore tried to > persuade Malfoy to turn to the right side and no one would have > to die he offered the OOP help in protecting him and his parents > which Malfoy declined. Malfoy had made up his mind to continue > with the evil plan and let Snape kill Dumbledore; he chose the > evil over the good and is not redeemable. Geoff: I fear I must disagree with you here, My interpretation of canon is that we are /not/ shown a Draco who "had made up his mind to continue with he evil plan." I am not sure either that he knew about Snape taking the Unbreakable Vow to protect him. Let's consider some canon evidence (or lack of it): `"I haven't got any options!" said Malfoy and he was suddenly as white as Dumbledore. "I've got to do it! He'll kill me! He'll kill my whole family!" "I appreciate the difficulty of your position," said Dumbledore. "Why else do you think I have not confronted you before now? Because I knew that you would have been murdered if Lord Voldemort realised that I suspected you."' (HBP "the Lightning-Struck Tower" p.553 UK edition) `" I can help you Draco." "No, you can't," said Malfoy, his wand hand shaking very badly indeed. "Nobody can. He told me to do it or he'll kill me. I've got no choice." "Come over to the right side, Draco... ...come over to the right side, Draco you are not a killer..." Malfoy stared at Dumbledore. "But I got this far didn't I?" he said slowly. "They thought I'd die in the attempt, but I'm here... and you're in my power... I'm the one with the wand... you're at my mercy..." "No, Draco," said Dumbledore quietly. "It is my mercy, and not yours, that matters now." Malfoy did not speak. His mouth was open, his wand hand still trembling.' (ibid. pp.552-53) This is not the boastful, swaggering Draco we saw when he first appeared on the rooftop (p.546). His confidence has been gradually ebbing away as the realisation of his own fragile personal position has been underlined during his conversation with Dumbledore. And the decline continues.... `"Well, I cannot pretend it does not disgust me a little," said Dumbledore. "And, yes, I am a little shocked that Draco here invited you, of all people, into the school where his friends live " "I didn't," breathed Malfoy. He was not even looking at Greyback; he did not seem to want to even glance at him. "I didn't know he was going to come ?"' (ibid. p.554) `"No," said the fourth Death eater sharply. He has a heavy brutal- looking face. "We've got orders. Draco's got to do it. Now, Draco and quickly." Malfoy was showing less resolution than ever. He looked terrified as he stared into Dumbledore's face .' (ibid. pp.554-55) `"Now, Draco, quickly!" said the brutal-faced man angrily. But Malfoy's hand was shaking so badly that he could barely aim.' (ibid. p.555) Here we have got an idealistic teenager (idealistic for the wrong cause obviously) who has been buoyed up on the high of doing something for Voldemort who suddenly finds the light of the real world breaking in through the window and that light revealing a much darker and dangerous place that he was hoping to enter. Draco is now a badly frightened and disorientated youth and certainly still far form irredeemable. The influences on him now will be crucial. From nrenka at yahoo.com Sun Jan 22 14:16:50 2006 From: nrenka at yahoo.com (nrenka) Date: Sun, 22 Jan 2006 14:16:50 -0000 Subject: ESE!Lupin condensed and Lupin and Sirius replies In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146844 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "pippin_999" wrote: > Nora: > Some parts of this theory can be argued for in isolation, and might > make good sense. But the whole shebang? If Lupin were that > unbelievably competent and lucky, he should be sitting on a > tropical island of his choice rolling in dough and having hot > waitresses bring him drinks. > > Pippin: > The same would have to be said of Traitor!Snape. It's not anywhere close in terms of sheer activity. Traitor!Snape has not had a finger in almost every event of evil in the books, and this theory does have Lupin making that incredible run. In addition, we do still have the possibility of Snape ending up OFH or some variation (that murder on the tower wasn't faked or planned), but not always having been such. I see some nods to potential flexibility in this theory's Lupin, but not much. It's especially noticable when we come to Peter's role. If we assume that Peter *is* the traitor and the spy etc., then we have a whole bunch of events that Snape is tangential to--but ones you want to argue Lupin was totally implicated in. Making Peter into the dupe loads far too many events onto Lupin. > Pippin: > She doesn't have to burden one character with the whole didactic > message either. What's wrong with having Lupin be an ideal teacher > but a moral failure, while Snape is the reverse? No, she doesn't. But our perception of burden depends on what the didactic message *is*. You're interested in that particular lesson being played out, and I see the reasons for it. It's been a favorite of many listies, perhaps encapsulated in 'good but not nice, nice but not good'. However, there's no guarantee that's what she's ultimately interested in and going for. I can think of any number of things that OFH!Snape and 'weak in the past and getting more of a backbone'!Lupin could represent. YMMV. -Nora yawns and looks for tea From amiabledorsai at yahoo.com Sun Jan 22 16:09:00 2006 From: amiabledorsai at yahoo.com (amiabledorsai) Date: Sun, 22 Jan 2006 16:09:00 -0000 Subject: Draco and Harry (was:The GoF Train Scene - and beyond...) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146845 > Betsy Hp: > Second, I think Draco is still stung from Harry's rejection of him > in PS/SS. And that's especially interesting to me, because I think > it is significant that Draco was the only person interested in > befriending Harry before knowing that he was *the* Harry Potter. And Draco was so gracious, too--I mean, I'd be all over a person who, at our first meeting, bragged about himself, insulted my mother, insulted my only friend, sneered at my opinion about my only friend, and then interrogated me to see if my family was good enough to go to Hogwarts. Mrs. Weasley and the twins, by contrast, were ever so mean to him before they knew who he was... Amiable Dorsai From kchuplis at alltel.net Sun Jan 22 16:31:15 2006 From: kchuplis at alltel.net (Karen) Date: Sun, 22 Jan 2006 10:31:15 -0600 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Snape again In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <81DADDC6-8B64-11DA-9A67-000393B04DDE@alltel.net> No: HPFGUIDX 146846 On Sunday, January 22, 2006, at 01:46 AM, allies426 wrote: > > Allie: > > I have to object.? Snape told Voldemort about the prophecy, causing > Voldemort to target the Potters.? Potters die. > > Snape goaded Sirius for inaction for an entire year.? He didn't make > it clear to Harry that he had understood, "He's got Padfoot!" when > Harry thought Voldemort had Sirius.? Ministry of Magic debacle > ensues, Sirius dies.? While not directly Snape's fault, you can see > why Harry blames him. > > Snape cast an Avada Kedavra that Harry believes killed Dumbledore.?? > Dumbledore dies (okay, it's up for debate, but Harry believes it). > > Harry has a lot more reason to feel that Snape is to blame for the > deaths in his life than Snape has to blame the Marauders for all of > the problems in his.? It may be irrational in some instances, but I > definitely think that Harry's feelings are more justified than > Snape's. > > It's not a question of justification. My point was that, really, until DD's death, Harry really has only class/school reasons to hate Snape. Even in his blaming Snape for Sirius' death, Harry is constantly pushing the niggling bit of guilt that he *did* rush into a situation that when looked at in retrospect, didn't add up (as Hermione pointed out over and over). He *knows* it's partially his fault, maybe more. Sure Snape goaded Sirius, but even without that, pretend it never happened and that Snape was a perfect gentleman, I can still see Sirius plunging to the rescue- I'm pretty sure Harry can too. It was in Sirius' nature. Harry knows that. I think Harry *doesn't* really blame Snape for Sirius' death at a deeper level. Don't mistake me either on Harry's need to rescue Sirius. Emotionally, this kid is - . - that close to the brink when LV feeds him that dream. Ripe for the plucking. LV is really really good at picking and choosing when the best time to hit someone at a vulnerable spot is. But, when it comes down to the bottom line, Harry knows at the end that if he had kept a cooler head, none of it need have happened. That's why I say Snape is the convenient receptacle for Harry's hate over *everything*. I'm not saying he doesn't have more cause or worse things (as far as we know) to be emotionally burdened over (at least at this point in his life). I'm just pointing out similarities. kchuplis From patriciah711 at yahoo.com Sun Jan 22 05:13:06 2006 From: patriciah711 at yahoo.com (Patricia Hurley) Date: Sat, 21 Jan 2006 21:13:06 -0800 (PST) Subject: How did he know? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20060122051306.68915.qmail@web52806.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 146847 Adi wrote: I was wondering about how Voldemort could have found about the spell to make horcruxes eventhough it is supposed to be such a scret and unmentionable subject. He found it even while he was at Hogwarts, so how could a teen, no matter how talented, find such a thing without arousing the interest of Dumbledore who was, as he says, has been watching Tom Riddle, all the time,during his school days? Patricia: I think it is fair to asume that Voldemort had an extreme amount of power, even when he was still Tom Riddle. He had great magical prowess but was also extremely charming and well liked. He could have weasled or cursed people into giving information. It is also likely that he used outside sources. Just because he may have known about it at Hogwart's doesn't mean that there weren't other avenues of information (i.e. Shops and books from Knockturn alley, including Mr. Burke).I find him more than capable of gathering the necessary infromation. Patricia. From R.Vink2 at chello.nl Sun Jan 22 17:19:39 2006 From: R.Vink2 at chello.nl (Renee) Date: Sun, 22 Jan 2006 17:19:39 -0000 Subject: ESE!Lupin condensed and Lupin and Sirius replies In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146848 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "pippin_999" wrote: > > > Renee: > Lily telling Lupin about the switch because she > does not believe it's him, doesn't work, because the only other > possible spy is Peter. If Lupin is innocent, Peter is not. And unless > Lily's 100% convinced of Peter's innocence, she'll never consent to > making the switch. (And no. Lily being overruled by James is NOT > believable.) > > Pippin: > I think it was Lily, and she didn't want to believe that > any of her friends were guilty. It might be that she only > met with Lupin to let him know that *she* still trusted him, and > he, who seems to have some talent as a legilimens, sensed > that she was lying about Sirius being secret-keeper and > was then able to work out the truth. Peter's disappearance > would be a clue. > Renee: To me, this is not at all satisfactory. There is too much at stake for Lily to allow herself this kind of wishful thinking: the lives of her husband and baby, and her own life. Lily was a very intelligent and highly competent woman, not a sentimental fool who would stick her head in the sand in wartime, just because mistrusting her friends robbed her of this warm and fluffy feeling. (In the pensieve scene, she doesn't display an ounce of sentimentality.) Anxious to do the utmost to protect her child, she would not have taken the slightest risk when choosing a Secret Keeper. That she went along with Sirius and James and accepted Peter, can only mean one thing: she, too, believed Lupin was the spy. She's not anywhere near him in Moody's picture either, is she? Whereas Peter is sitting between her and James. And if she suspected Lupin, she had little reason to approach him and every reason to avoid him. Moreover, if Lupin is a legilimens (though let's remember this isn't canon at this point), Sirius knew: one of the arguments for Lupin being a legilimens is their eye-contact at the beginning of the Shrieking Shack episode and the swift conclusions Lupin draws there. If Sirius knew Lupin was a legilimens *and* he suspected Lupin of being the spy, he probably warned Lily specifically against having eye-contact with Lupin. So, Lily as the one who gave it away: totally unconvincing. B.T.W. - this has no bearing on the ESE!Lupin theory - this whole legilimency/occlumency busines makes the Secret Keeper switch rather problematic. If Voldemort caught Sirius and used legilimency on him, he'd have discovered the identity of the real SK very soon. And don't tell me the OotP members don't know Voldemort is a legilimens. It makes no sense to me for DD to withold this knowledge from them. (Actually, I believe JKR made up Occlumency and Legilimency after PoA, though I don't expect this to become a popular theory on the list.) I'll leave it to the other ESE!Lupin nonbelievers to reply to the rest of Pippin's answers/explanations, except for this point: > > > Pippin: > > > Lupin was instrumental in the Diary plot, knowing, as JKR says on her > > > website, that it could have made present day Voldemort stronger. > > > > > > > > Neri: My apologies, I missed that part too. Canon? > > Pippin: > http://www.jkrowling.co.uk/textonly/en/faq_view.cfm?id=17 If I'm not mistaken, Neri was asking for canon evidence concerning Lupin's involvement with the diary. That evidence doesn't exist. And presenting your own theory as fact doesn't make it canonical. Renee From miles at martinbraeutigam.de Sun Jan 22 15:45:34 2006 From: miles at martinbraeutigam.de (Miles) Date: Sun, 22 Jan 2006 16:45:34 +0100 Subject: When will the ministry start kicking butt and taking names? References: Message-ID: <006701c61f6a$e3264b90$14b2a8c0@rechnerchen> No: HPFGUIDX 146849 quick_silver71 wrote: > Miles I agree with your statement about not liking the > characterization Ministry. But I'm not sure that part of that isn't > deliberate on the part of JK (aside from taking a shot at > politicians). So part of Voldemort plan is to kill the > future/current leaders of the wizarding world it seems...which could > be why the wizarding world is "scrapping the bottom of the barrel" > with people like Fudge and Umbridge in power. > > It could also be that the system of checks and balances in the > wizarding world has been thrown out by the war with Voldemort. Take > Lucius Malfoy as an example...Lucius was able to use his influence, > money, power, etc to sway the Ministry and have some presence within > it. In another world Lucius would have to compete against people > like James Potter, who was also a pure-blood, rich, well liked > (unless your name is Snape), etc, for influence within the Ministry. Miles: I totally agree with the second part of your argumentation, but I'm not so sure about the first one. The man who was supposed to be Minister instead of Fudge was Crouch sr - we saw him, and he is really not the prototype of politician I would like to see in charge. He maybe was Voldemorts worst enemy during the first part of the WW, but obviously he was not killed during the war. I don't think that Voldemort would like to kill "future leaders" like James Potter and let someone like Crouch live. As a matter of fact, we do not know too much about casualities among Ministry personell (apart from the Aurors) during the first war, so it is very speculative to assume a strategic plan of Voldemort behind his murders. Actually, I do not get the impression that Voldemort has a strategy - what we see is tactics. susanbones2003 wrote: > Do you find Slughorn to be "good?" > I find him exceptionally dodgy, apparently playing both ends against > the middle and not at all an example of Slytherin to be emulated. Do I > misunderstand you? Karen wrote: > If there is one character in this series that is clearly OFH! it is > Slughorn. He is an extremely uncomfortable person. I do think that for > the most part he is too much of a coward to help the dark side, but > how > much help to the "good" side is debatable. However, for some reason I > did feel that the death of DD seemed to change him a bit. I would not > be surprised to see him as a bit stronger person in the next book. Miles: The word "good" may not be appropriate. We debated Slughorn's character and behaviour before. Slughorn is obviously not a courageous man. But he is was hiding from Voldemort, he never was a DE, and obviously has no sympathies for Voldemort's wo/men. He is not a fighter for Dumbledore - do we really want to blame him? But we see Dumbledore asking him for help, he hesitates, but he comes to Hogwarts. If you ask me, we will see more of him in book 7 (I agree with Karen here) - Dumbledore had reasons to call him back, and JKR to introduce this new character. But back to "good" - he is on Dumbledore's side, and he is Voldemort's enemy, so yes, he is "good" - with quite a lot of flaws. Miles From kjones at telus.net Sun Jan 22 18:32:24 2006 From: kjones at telus.net (Kathryn Jones) Date: Sun, 22 Jan 2006 10:32:24 -0800 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: How did he know? In-Reply-To: <20060122051306.68915.qmail@web52806.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20060122051306.68915.qmail@web52806.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <43D3CFB8.3080903@telus.net> No: HPFGUIDX 146850 Patricia Hurley wrote: > Adi wrote: I was wondering about how Voldemort could have found about the spell > to make horcruxes eventhough it is supposed to be such a scret and > unmentionable subject. He found it even while he was at Hogwarts, so > how could a teen, no matter how talented, find such a thing without > arousing the interest of Dumbledore who was, as he says, has been > watching Tom Riddle, all the time,during his school days? KJ writes: I'm thinking that Grindelwald had something to do with Riddle's education. I don't think that he made his first horcrux until after he left school. JKR said that Grindelwald's death was important and he is listed as having died in 1945, the year Riddle graduated. We do know that he had made at least one horcrux while working at B&B. He was trying to get someone to tell him how to do it while at Hogwarts. KJ From R.Vink2 at chello.nl Sun Jan 22 19:13:57 2006 From: R.Vink2 at chello.nl (Renee) Date: Sun, 22 Jan 2006 19:13:57 -0000 Subject: ESE!Lupin condensed In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146851 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "nrenka" wrote: > > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Jen Reese" > wrote: > > > Jen: Not to mention Harry's hatred would shift to Lupin, collapsing > > the carefully planned animosity between Harry and Snape like a > > house of cards. > > Nora: > I'm not Pippin and she should correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe > she's argued that would be one very solid reason *for* ESE!Lupin. > It's the reversal yet again as Harry has to learn to deal with > difficult reality; the seemingly evil Snape is loyal and the > seemingly kind and loyal Lupin is eeeevil. JKR is waiting to spring > the trap on us. Renee: But she's already done something of the kind, and repeatedly at that. In PS/SS we had the seemingly evil Snape turning out to be loyal, and in CoS we had the seemingly nice Diary!Riddle turning out to be evil. In PoA we had the seemingly evil Sirius Black turning out to be good, and in GoF we had the seemingly helpful Moody turning out to be fake and evil. OTOH, in OotP we've had someone who seemed evil turn out even more evil: Umbridge, not only a power-hungry bureaucrat, but also the one who sicced the Dementors on Harry. In HBP we had someone who seemed evil turn out a little less evil, but still not good: Draco, who used an unforgivable on Rosmerta, whose machinations almost killed Katie Bell and Ron and who let the Death-eaters into Hogwarts, but who turned out to be unable to kill Dumbledore. Also, there are many examples of people who do not only seem good, but are good: Hagrid, Neville, Dumbledore... Renee From HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com Sun Jan 22 19:58:23 2006 From: HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com (HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com) Date: 22 Jan 2006 19:58:23 -0000 Subject: Weekly Chat, 1/22/2006, 1:00 pm Message-ID: <1137959903.14.60138.m30@yahoogroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 146852 Reminder from the Calendar of HPforGrownups http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/cal Weekly Chat Sunday January 22, 2006 1:00 pm - 1:00 pm (This event repeats every week.) Notes: Don't forget, chat happens today, 11 am Pacific, 2 pm Eastern, 7 pm UK time. Chat times do not change for Daylight Saving/Summer Time. Chat generally goes on for about 5 hours, but can last as long as people want it to last. To get into Chat, just go to the group online: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups and click on "Chat" in the lefthand menu. If you have problems with this, go to http://www.yahoo.com and in the bottom box on the left side of the page click on "Chat". Once you're logged into any room, type /join *g.HPforGrownups ; this should take you right in. If you have an Set up birthday reminders! http://us.rd.yahoo.com/cal_us/rem/?http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/cal?v=9&evt_type=13 Copyright 2006 Yahoo! Inc. All Rights Reserved. http://www.yahoo.com Privacy Policy: http://privacy.yahoo.com/ Terms of Service: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From foxmoth at qnet.com Sun Jan 22 20:15:58 2006 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Sun, 22 Jan 2006 20:15:58 -0000 Subject: ESE!Lupin condensed and Lupin and Sirius replies In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146853 > > > Nora: > > Some parts of this theory can be argued for in isolation, and might > > make good sense. But the whole shebang? If Lupin were that > > unbelievably competent and lucky, he should be sitting on a > > tropical island of his choice rolling in dough and having hot > > waitresses bring him drinks. > > > > Pippin: > > The same would have to be said of Traitor!Snape. > > It's not anywhere close in terms of sheer activity. Traitor!Snape > has not had a finger in almost every event of evil in the books, and > this theory does have Lupin making that incredible run. Pippin: As far as Harry's concerned, Snape's had a love affair with Dark Arts since he was little, invented dark curses, consorted with future Death Eaters, called Lily a mudblood, tried to get James and his friends expelled, joined the DE's, sicced Voldemort on Lily and James, falsely repented, tormented Gryffindor students, tried to get Harry expelled, got Lupin sacked, deliberately botched the occlumency lessons, sent Sirius to his death, conned Dumbledore into making him DADA professor, and finally murdered him. Sounds like quite a run to me. Nora: I see some nods to potential flexibility in > this theory's Lupin, but not much. > > It's especially noticable when we come to Peter's role. If we assume > that Peter *is* the traitor and the spy etc., then we have a whole > bunch of events that Snape is tangential to--but ones you want to > argue Lupin was totally implicated in. Making Peter into the dupe > loads far too many events onto Lupin. Pippin: ::shrug:: I'd give about a 50% confidence rating to Lupin's guilt for the Pettigrew killings, whereas I'm about 98% sure that Lupin helped Peter escape and killed Sirius. But I can't get over the chill that goes through me every time I imagine Lupin about to kill his childhood friend as casually as you'd stomp on a bug. No "Peter, how could you?", none of the loathing or hatred he showed just a few minutes before when he was discussing what a louse *he* had been for betraying Dumbledore's trust...just hasta la vista. Someone who could do that could kill Cedric just because he was in the way of the glorious plan. But maybe Peter did do it, and Lupin was just there as Voldemort's back up, in case Peter got any more brainwaves. Only... I just don't see Peter as a killer. Maybe, if he could do it safely, as Sirius says, without any risk to himself. A stab in the back or a cursing someone in their sleep. But killing twelve people in broad daylight with a wand behind his back, or taking on a triwizard champion who already has his wand out, knowing you're going to have to beat him to the draw? If Peter can do that, why isn't *he* on that tropical island rollling in dough etc? JKR seems to have actually altered the text to make sure we don't see Voldemort planning to have Peter kill anyone. http://www.hp-lexicon.org/about/books/gf/differences-gf.html At least in the UK edition, Voldie doesn't think Peter is a killer either. Speaking of which... In GoF, Voldemort is worried about Peter running away, not that Peter is going to mix Draught of Living Death into his unicorn blood and snake venom cocktail, then transfigure him into a rock. I don't think horcruxes would help much if that happened. And who is providing Voldie with unicorn blood, if Peter must remain close at his master's side? Pippin From graverobber23 at yahoo.com Sun Jan 22 20:19:11 2006 From: graverobber23 at yahoo.com (graverobber23) Date: Sun, 22 Jan 2006 20:19:11 -0000 Subject: R.A.B.? different theory Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146854 I have a different theory on who R.A.B. might be. Most people think it is Regulus Black, but what if it was Voldemort's enemy during his school years? If you notice through out the books, Slytherin and Gryffindor have never gotten along. It seems that every Slytherin has a Gryffindor rival (i.e. Snape/James Potter, Draco/Harry, Ramalda/Herminone). So it makes me wonder if this R.A.B. would be Voldemort's rival during school. It never mentions this in the books that he had a rival during school, but I am sure he had to have had one. So since Voldemort was inquiring about Horcruxes in school, his rival might have heard him talk about it or seen one. That way he would know what is going on and try to stop him. Like I said it is just a theory, but thought it was a good one. graverobber From rkdas at charter.net Sun Jan 22 21:24:56 2006 From: rkdas at charter.net (susanbones2003) Date: Sun, 22 Jan 2006 21:24:56 -0000 Subject: When will the ministry start kicking butt and taking names? In-Reply-To: <006701c61f6a$e3264b90$14b2a8c0@rechnerchen> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146855 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Miles" wrote: > SNIPPED> Miles: > The word "good" may not be appropriate. We debated Slughorn's character and > behaviour before. Slughorn is obviously not a courageous man. But he is was > hiding from Voldemort, he never was a DE, and obviously has no sympathies > for Voldemort's wo/men. He is not a fighter for Dumbledore - do we really > want to blame him? But we see Dumbledore asking him for help, he hesitates, > but he comes to Hogwarts. If you ask me, we will see more of him in book 7 > (I agree with Karen here) - Dumbledore had reasons to call him back, and JKR > to introduce this new character. But back to "good" - he is on Dumbledore's > side, and he is Voldemort's enemy, so yes, he is "good" - with quite a lot > of flaws. Miles: If you re-read Slughorn with an eye towards someone who'd not really decided which side to play on, you get a much different picture. Being at Hogwarts can easily be read as a move on his part to gain information for the other side. Or to keep an eye on Severus. Not everyone who is at Hogwarts is a good guy and I think Slughorn has lots to answer for. But he's not an interesting character at all, just something that crawled out from under a rock. His release of the horcrux memory was an extremely calculated thing, not a triumph for Harry. > Miles > From vuurdame at xs4all.nl Sun Jan 22 21:42:00 2006 From: vuurdame at xs4all.nl (festuco) Date: Sun, 22 Jan 2006 21:42:00 -0000 Subject: ESE!Lupin condensed In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146856 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Jen Reese" wrote: > I'm sure there are other events I'm not remembering. No offense to > Pippin here because ESE!Lupin is probably the most well-thought out > and clever theory around, but I'm hoping for something even bigger > as the huge denoument of the series. When I first came to this list I participated in a few ESELuppin! debates. Nowadays I stay out of them, because I think this theory is so far fetched and so based on wishful reading of canon that it is - sorry Pippin - a waste of time to discuss it. I always wondered why somebody would want to make such a weird and unlikely theory and when Pippin explained she thougth the books were on the murder of Sirius Black I knew this theory was utter rubbish. Sorry for the strong language Pippin, I very, very much enjoy your other posts but ESELupin! No. Not in the last place because I very much get the impression you want to twist and twirl all kinds of facts so that they fit into your theory, instead of looking at your theory and see if it fits the facts. The books are about one Harry Potter and the murder of Sirius Black though very important to Harry is just not that important to the plot. These books are not murder mysteries. They are the journey of Harry Potter to adulthood and to the defeat of Voldemort. Gerry From nrenka at yahoo.com Sun Jan 22 21:59:32 2006 From: nrenka at yahoo.com (nrenka) Date: Sun, 22 Jan 2006 21:59:32 -0000 Subject: ESE!Lupin condensed and Lupin and Sirius replies In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146857 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "pippin_999" wrote: > Pippin: > As far as Harry's concerned, Snape's had a love affair with Dark > Arts since he was little, invented dark curses, consorted with > future Death Eaters, called Lily a mudblood, tried to get James and > his friends expelled, joined the DE's, sicced Voldemort on Lily and > James, falsely repented, tormented Gryffindor students, tried to > get Harry expelled, got Lupin sacked, deliberately botched the > occlumency lessons, sent Sirius to his death, conned Dumbledore > into making him DADA professor, and finally murdered him. Sounds > like quite a run to me. Right, when you put it that way. But we can still group these things into chunks of related activities, and some of them are quite spread out over time. For instance, there's stuff related to Harry at school, stuff dealing with the prophecy, and stuff dealing with the post-GoF state of affairs. What I'm objecting to is that your ESE! Lupin theory puts Lupin into every situation where he could possibly have done the evil thing, when even the most extreme postulation of ESE!Snape notes there are a number of events he was probably not involved in at all. For instance, this Lupin planned the Prank, messed with the entire SK situation, is responsible for the Longbottoms' insanity, murdered unicorns, murdered Sirius, etc.--all generally discrete events separated in time, not aspects of the same situation. This seems incredibly overextended. As for emotional reactions to characters, each person gets chills or not at different things. What has to be asked (and is usually only askable in retrospect) is whether that's a function of the text or of the reader. Witness some subsets of shippers and their clues and emotional reactions to the text. I'm not saying that anyone *has* to react in a specific way--reactions are individual. I'm just saying that sometimes personal reaction ends up not lining up with the text's ultimate presentation of a character or events. -Nora wishes the sun would stay up longer, in the cold From foxmoth at qnet.com Sun Jan 22 22:01:34 2006 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Sun, 22 Jan 2006 22:01:34 -0000 Subject: ESE!Lupin condensed and Lupin and Sirius replies In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146858 Renee: > > > > Pippin: > > > > Lupin was instrumental in the Diary plot, knowing, as JKR says > on her website, that it could have made present day Voldemort stronger. > > > > > > > > > > > > Neri: My apologies, I missed that part too. Canon? > > > > Pippin: > > http://www.jkrowling.co.uk/textonly/en/faq_view.cfm?id=17 Renee: > If I'm not mistaken, Neri was asking for canon evidence concerning > Lupin's involvement with the diary. That evidence doesn't exist. And > presenting your own theory as fact doesn't make it canonical. > Pippin: I thought Neri was asking for the canon that the diary could have made present day Voldemort stronger. But no problem. The evidence that someone besides Lucius is involved is strong enough, IMO. In the first place, Dobby refers to a plot. He must have heard Lucius discuss it with someone. Who? According to Dumbledore, Lucius did not know that the Diary would do anything but open the Chamber. If that's so, then the Malfoys didn't know it would make present day Voldemort stronger, and that's consistent with Lucius and Narcissa not trying to find their old master. But if the fact that the diary would make present day Voldemort stronger is relevant, then *somebody* must have known that. Pippin From kking0731 at gmail.com Sun Jan 22 22:20:32 2006 From: kking0731 at gmail.com (Kathy King) Date: Sun, 22 Jan 2006 17:20:32 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: When will the ministry start kicking butt and taking names? In-Reply-To: References: <006701c61f6a$e3264b90$14b2a8c0@rechnerchen> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146859 Miles: If you re-read Slughorn with an eye towards someone who'd not really decided which side to play on, you get a much different picture. Being at Hogwarts can easily be read as a move on his part to gain information for the other side. Or to keep an eye on Severus. Not everyone who is at Hogwarts is a good guy and I think Slughorn has lots to answer for. But he's not an interesting character at all, just something that crawled out from under a rock. His release of the horcrux memory was an extremely calculated thing, not a triumph for Harry. Snow: Interestingly enough one of the first hesitations Slughorn had with becoming a teacher at the school was the fact that he didn't want to be seen as a member of the Order: "Still?the prudent wizard keeps his head down in such times. All very well for Dumbledore to talk, but taking up a post a Hogwarts just now would be tantamount to declaring my public allegiance to the Order of the Phoenix!?" HBP pg. 72 Does this mean that all the teachers at Hogwarts are indeed Order members or are they seen as such (birds of a feather flock together)? I wandered about this from the first time I read it. Slughorn is, undoubtedly a ministry official type of guy, so why would he have been introduced but to give us information about Voldemort(?)?I think he may have given us a whole lot more; like Lily being one of his all time favorites despite the fact she was muggleborn. I wouldn't discard Slughorn so quickly if I were you he is very giving of information. Snow [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From Nanagose at aol.com Sun Jan 22 22:40:53 2006 From: Nanagose at aol.com (spotsgal) Date: Sun, 22 Jan 2006 22:40:53 -0000 Subject: ESE!Lupin condensed and Lupin and Sirius replies In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146860 >> Neri: >> I probably missed this last part too. I can't understand how could >> ESE!Lupin convince himself that Sirius was a DE and why is it even >> needed. > Pippin: > Goodguy!Lupin theorists have this problem too, though they usually > gloss over it by telling themselves that Lupin didn't *really* > believe Sirius was a DE. Christina: I certainly don't. Lupin convinced himself that Sirius was a DE because witnesses said he killed 13 people and Dumbledore verified the fact that Sirius was the Potters' Secret Keeper. Simple. It's definitely enough evidence for a rational person like Lupin to believe. The problem comes for the ESE!Lupin folks, because it's a lot harder to believe that your friend killed 13 people when you were there and you know that YOU did it, no matter how powerful your skills of denial are. >> Neri: >> Umm... Barty's veritaserum confession took 7 pages in GoF, in >> addition to 3 pages of voluntary bragging and 2 pages of >> Dumbledore's explanations, to a total of almost one chapter, with >> some questions (like Barty's part in the Longbottoms affair) still >> left unanswered, and that was after only *one* book. I'd imagine >> the final confession of ESE!Lupin would take at least three >> chapters, smack in the middle of the Big Climax. As Pip!squeak used >> to write, I'd recommend a cup of tea and a biscuit. >Pippin: >Are you seriously advancing the convoluted denouements of PoA and >GoF as a reason *not* to expect the denouement of HP7 to be >complicated? Christina: Of course it will be complicated, but I think what Neri's trying to say is that each book dedicates a certain amount of page-time to the "big revelation" (except for, you might argue, HBP, which JKR has said is the first half of a whole). Since Book 7 isn't going to be longer than any of the books we already have, it's safe to say that a similar amount of page-time will be given to the big revelation in HP7 (if there is one at all). ESE!Lupin essentially goes back and re-does all of the revelations in the previous books. We aren't just figuring out who the spy was (as in PoA), and we aren't just figuring out who set Harry up in the TWT (as in GoF), we are figuring out all of these things, again. If took an entire chapter to explain the events of GoF, it should take an entire chapter to re-explain those events. > Pippin: > > JKR seems to have actually altered the text to make sure we > don't see Voldemort planning to have Peter kill anyone. > > http://www.hp-lexicon.org/about/books/gf/differences-gf.html > > At least in the UK edition, Voldie doesn't think Peter is a > killer either. Christina: The two differing "versions" of the books are a result of the fact that JKR has two different editors. There's no way of knowing which version is what JKR originally had and which is the edit. They might both be edits. The US version has stronger language throughout the chapter - there are two different instances where "curse" is changed to "murder" and "one more obstacle removed" is changed to "one more death." If I had to guess, I'd say that the language was made stronger to clarify what Voldemort's plan was. In any case, both versions are canon, and both are approved by JKR. If she wanted to insinuate that Voldemort wasn't planning on having Peter kill anyone (or didn't think he'd be able to do it), then she would have done so in both versions. The fact that the language is different at all is probably more of a clue that these lines *aren't* very important. Christina From agdisney at msn.com Sun Jan 22 22:41:27 2006 From: agdisney at msn.com (Andrea Grevera) Date: Sun, 22 Jan 2006 17:41:27 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: How did he know? References: <20060122051306.68915.qmail@web52806.mail.yahoo.com> <43D3CFB8.3080903@telus.net> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146861 Patricia Hurley wrote: > Adi wrote: I was wondering about how Voldemort could have found about the spell > to make horcruxes eventhough it is supposed to be such a scret and > unmentionable subject. He found it even while he was at Hogwarts, so > how could a teen, no matter how talented, find such a thing without > arousing the interest of Dumbledore who was, as he says, has been > watching Tom Riddle, all the time,during his school days? KJ writes: I'm thinking that Grindelwald had something to do with Riddle's education. I don't think that he made his first horcrux until after he left school. JKR said that Grindelwald's death was important and he is listed as having died in 1945, the year Riddle graduated. We do know that he had made at least one horcrux while working at B&B. He was trying to get someone to tell him how to do it while at Hogwarts. KJ Andie: I too question how he found out about the spell but also where did he hear the word horcrux to begin with. Maybe during his summer trips to Knockturn Alley he found something but I'm pretty sure he did not hear it from anyone that would be against the dark arts. Before posting to any list, you MUST read the group's Admin File! http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/files/Admin_Files/HBF_Text__MUST_READ Please use accurate subject headings and snip unnecessary material from posts to which you're replying! Yahoo! Groups Links [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From kchuplis at alltel.net Sun Jan 22 23:21:07 2006 From: kchuplis at alltel.net (kchuplis) Date: Sun, 22 Jan 2006 23:21:07 -0000 Subject: Snape again In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146862 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "quick_silver71" wrote: > > > Yet when we see Snape in Spinner's End he certainly doesn't seem all > that socially dysfunctional. Snape can clearly mingle with the pure- > bloods when he needs to and Narcissa describes him as being > Lucius "old friend." > kchuplis: I guess I am thinking of "social" in the ability to just mingle at will. I am very good when with people I'm around so much that I am comfortable with them, but not so good in situations like parties, organized groups (seminars at work etc.). Also, I am thinking of at school (which in H.S. I sucked, but college was different because I was with people in my own discipline. Still wasn't widely social). In Hogwarts both Tom and Harry have a pretty wide circle of friends (well "friends" for Tom) but not Snape. Maybe there are a few, but we see him completely alone at the end of semester, after tests, not with a group as is depicted for James and Harry. Not being socially gifted does not mean you have no friends or can't get along in intimate situations. I guess I see that VERY much for myself and it is something I really really envy in others. Get more than four people around me socially and I'm not very good. However, I am a good leader. Wierd huh? quicksilver: > > But we've heard nothing of awards for James, the other Marauders, > Lily, Dumbledore, Slughorn, McGonagall, and a host of other > characters that are charming and/or powerful. kchuplis: We hear plenty of commentary though about how brilliant these people are. James is referred several times to as being, well, quite the wunderkind by several people. Sirius too. I'll make note as I go next time, but it really does occur more than once. Slughorn goes on and on about Lily, she is a prefect (we know that prefects are *usuallly* pretty good students), McGonagall talks about always getting applause for her transfiguration to a cat from third years when she introduces them to it. Dumbledore is referred to as genius over and over. Other than Lupin saying that not just anyone could brew wolfsbane and the kudos from DD over the mandrake potion, we don't hear a whole lot about Snape, and yet from the HBP we know he must have been a pretty strong student. But no one lauds him in word or award even as an adult. quicksilver: >nor is > Snape the undisputed Potions Master of the current generation (it > was Damocles Belby that invented Wolfsbane recently according to > Lupin). > kchuplis: He doesn't have to be the most brilliant to ever tred the halls of Hogwarts or the best potion maker to think he might have been better thought of at school when you consider what we DO hear. We see that he was probably uncommonly good at potions if Slughorn's praise of Harry isn't just blowing smoke up his pants. And that's a bit of my point too. Slughorn goes on and on about Lily, not Snape and yet, you would think per Slughorn's dialogue and the fact that we know (in retrospect) Harry is using Snape's recipes that Snape must have been at least as good as Lily. You don't have to be heralded as the best of all time to want some recognition as being talented in a peer situation. It is magnified for the young person. How did Snape feel knowing that he was (probably) as talented as Lily but he wasn't prefect, he wasn't talked about by hid teachers (as far as we know) like Lily was? And he wasn't popular (pretty evident). I just think those things could have done a big enough number on his ego to make him vulnerable to LV. From horridporrid03 at yahoo.com Mon Jan 23 00:18:12 2006 From: horridporrid03 at yahoo.com (horridporrid03) Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2006 00:18:12 -0000 Subject: Draco and Harry (was:The GoF Train Scene - and beyond...) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146863 > >>Betsy Hp: > > ...I think it is significant that Draco was the only > > person interested in befriending Harry before knowing that he > > was *the* Harry Potter. > >>Amiable Dorsai: > And Draco was so gracious, too--I mean, I'd be all over a person > who, at our first meeting, bragged about himself, insulted my > mother, insulted my only friend, sneered at my opinion about my > only friend, and then interrogated me to see if my family was > good enough to go to Hogwarts. > Betsy Hp: Poor Draco . He really managed to stick his foot in it didn't he? Having been there a time or two myself I have a hard time hanging Draco for that sort of sin. Interestingly enough, the first question Harry asks Ron is if his whole family are wizards. He also regrets that he's lived with a Muggle family and tells Ron how horrible they are. And while there's no mention of Harry's dead parents, Ron is quite eager to hear about the night they died. (Ron obviously misses the connection, as he will in GoF, so I'm not accusing him of cruelty or anything.) It's interesting to me because Ron's and Harry's conversation is much like Draco's and Harry's. Family lines and wizarding purity is covered, the weirdness of muggles is discussed, and Ron doesn't sympathize with Harry being an orphan at all. A big difference is that Ron is openly impressed with Harry from the start, and a bit shy and self-effacing. Draco, on the other hand, is quite confident and out-going. Draco intimidates Harry, though I don't think he does it on purpose (he doesn't ask anything a WW raised child couldn't answer). And Ron, by his own self-doubt, puts Harry at ease. I do think Draco would have chafed under the "side-kick" role, unlike Ron. And their opening scenes show us as much. Ron is much more content to settle into Harry's shadow. Draco enjoys the spot- light a bit more and I think he'd have expected to be on more equal terms with Harry. (Their respective Quidditch positions are pretty illustrative of this, I think.) It's for the best that Harry gets adopted by the Weasleys. The Malfoys would have been a disaster. And Ron is much better in the supporting role than Draco could have been. I think it's also important that Harry sorted into Gryffindor and Draco became the head of Slytherin (for their peer group). But I still think a union between Harry and Draco is needed for Harry to defeat Voldemort. Gosh, JKR practically came right out and said so during the sorting in OotP. And I do see Draco's and Harry's first meeting as the beginning of a beautiful friendship. It's the old "hate each other on first sight" cliche, with all the mis-speakings and mis-interpertations such cliches involve. Frankly, if the Norbert incident had gone down a bit differently I think Draco and Harry may have become friends at that point. But than other things may have gone more smoothly and the series would have been less interesting. However, we're coming to the end of the series and Harry will need to be on full power to take down Voldemort, so it's time for these two boys to finally become friends. Betsy Hp From nkafkafi at yahoo.com Mon Jan 23 00:44:21 2006 From: nkafkafi at yahoo.com (nkafkafi) Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2006 00:44:21 -0000 Subject: ESE!Lupin condensed and Lupin and Sirius replies In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146864 > Pippin: > We don't know whether Snape's suspicion of Lupin is reliable or > not, since we have no idea what it's based on. Canon has > not refuted it, so it stands, IMO. So what if Snape's been > wrong about lots of things? Harry's been wrong about > lots of things too, but he was still right about Draco. > Neri: You repeatedly use this argument: "if canon has not refuted it ? than it stands". But I think it's a weak argument. Since canon is finite and, in fact, extremely limited comparing to the WW that it has to depict, it is *always* possible to find explanations that were not refuted. But in a well-written mystery plot the author is supposed to give us proper clues. Snape blamed the prank on all the Marauders and especially on James, so if his suspicion was supposed to point at ESE!Lupin it was a poorly written clue. > > > > > Pippin: > > > Needing an alias to hide behind while working undercover > with the werewolves, he used the name Wormtail. > > > > > > > Neri: > > An amazingly lucky shot for ESE!Lupin, considering the Potters and > > Sirius later decided about Peter as the Secret Keeper of their own > > volition. > > Pippin: > Yeah, but the bad guys get lucky once in a while. JKR is fair > that way. > Neri: I'm not saying the bad guys don't get lucky sometimes, but again, an arbitrary twist of fate doesn't constitute a proper clue. Solving a good mystery tale should be the uncovering of a chain of causes and effects, not a chain of lucky shots. > Pippin: > "Wormtail" is used as a red herring in the "Snape's Grudge" > chapter of PoA, where Lupin asks Snape if he means Harry got the > map from "Mr. Wormtail or one of these people. " Of course Lupin > knows Snape is thinking of Lupin or Sirius, not Peter. > Neri: I don't see how Lupin mentioning "Wormtail or one of these people" on the Map is a clue or a red-herring for him using "Wormtail" as his code name. A good clue would be, for example, to hear Voldy or some DEs mentioning, when Peter is *not* around, something about "Wormtail" betraying the Potters, when in the end it will turn out that by Wormtail they meant ESE!Lupin. There were several occasions in the books where JKR could have used a clue of that sort, but IIRC she never did. She only "did" it once, *not* in the books themselves but in a chat. This is lousy mystery writing, if you can even call it writing. > Pippin: > The theory also explains why JKR introduced Mark Evans, > a nobody character with a "common" name after Crouch Jr. > had already been outed. It could have been a clue, along > with Harry claiming "Roonil Wazlib" as *his* nickname, that > she's not finished with that particular plot device. > Neri: Again, poor clues and some of them not in the books, but not even one good clue in the books that Lupin or anybody other than Peter ever used the code name "Wormtail". > Pippin: > Since we don't know what Lupin was doing in VW1, I > speculate freely. Certainly the groundwork is laid. > Neri: No harm in speculating, but again, if JKR is laying the ground for an ESE!Lupin revelation, and it depends on ESE!Lupin involved with the werewolves in VW1, then she's supposed to give us some clue that he was, not merely leave room for speculations. > > Neri: > > I probably missed this last part too. I can't understand how could > > ESE!Lupin convince himself that Sirius was a DE and why is it even needed. > > Pippin: > Goodguy!Lupin theorists have this problem too, though they usually > gloss over it by telling themselves that Lupin didn't *really* believe Sirius > was a DE. Unfortunately canon doesn't bear them out. Lupin's agony > and self-loathing over not telling Dumbledore about Sirius don't make > any sense unless Lupin sincerely believed Sirius was guilty. > > IMO, Lupin wanted to think he wasn't like Voldemort or Fenrir, > *he* wouldn't kill needlessly (Cedric hadn't died yet.) > > He did not want to think he had unintentionally murdered twelve > Muggles , so he made up a story to excuse himself, > helped by the fact that there were, according to Dumbledore in HBP, > excellent reasons to think that Sirius was guilty. He might even have gone > so far as to tell himself that the Secret Keeper switch was a bluff, that > Sirius *had* been the real secret keeper after all. Hmmm, that would > explain why he didn't search for Voldemort at once. What if he'd > given Voldemort false information? Bad wolfie! Neri: Lupin's confession makes prefect sense to me and sounds very much in character for Goodguy!Lupin. He always takes the blame on himself, while cutting the others a lot of slack (for example, in that very same confession he also accuses himself of "leading others along with me" when it's obvious he didn't lead anybody - James was always the leader of the Marauders and Sirius his deputy, and the animagi business was their idea). Goodguy!Lupin would not believe, deep in his heart, that Sirius was indeed a murderer and a traitor. That *would* be OOC for him, believing the worst about his friend. But the "facts" pointed out that Sirius must be a murderer and a traitor, so what would Goodguy!Lupin do? Would he turn Sirius in to the dementors? Of course not. So he invents a rationalization and then blames *himself* to be a coward and a betrayer of trust. All perfectly in character for Lupin. But Goodguy!Lupin doesn't kill 12 muggles and then convinces himself that he didn't. He doesn't betray his best friends to Voldemort and then blames *Sirius* to be the DE. That would be unbelievable for any sane person, but for the Lupin we have seen throughout the series it would also be completely OOC. > > > Pippin: > > > Since Quirrell was under suspicion, it was Lupin who met with Hagrid > > > at the Hogs Head. He also killed the unicorns. > > > > > > > Neri: > > I thought Hagrid said that the unicorns could *not* be killed by a > > werewolf? > > Pippin: > He says they're not fast enough. Doubtless he's thinking of > werewolves chasing a unicorn and bringing it down, not > spellwork. But Lupin, unlike the werewolves on the fringes > of the WW, is a fully qualified wizard. > Neri: So *any* qualified wizard could have killed the unicorns. Again, where is the clue that would point to Lupin specifically? In SS/PS, Ch. 15, p. 215 (Scholastics) Harry and Hermione track the wounded unicorn with Hagrid in the Forbidden Forest. We are told "Every now and then a ray of moonlight through the branches above lit a spot of silver-blue blood on the fallen leaves". So we know there was a moon. Two lines later Harry asks Hagrid "could a werewolf be killing the unicorns?" Hagrid could have answered, "it could" which would have been an excellent clue for ESE!Lupin, or at least he could have answered "it isn't full moon tonight so it can't be a werewolf" and that at least would imply that it could be a non-transformed werewolf. But Hagrid answers: "Not fast enough. It's not easy ter catch a unicorn, they're powerful magic creatures. I never knew one ter be hurt before". This answer suggests that it *was* a full moon night, and yet Hagrid didn't think a werewolf could catch a unicorn. Not that I think JKR was even thinking about Lupin when she wrote this, but if she was, then this constitutes a very lousy clue for ESE!Lupin killing the unicorn. > > Neri: > > So you think Lupin knew Peter was alive. And he was *inside* the > > castle the whole year, and he had never tried getting rid of Peter > > himself? > > Pippin: > Why should he, when Crookshanks had access to Gryffindor Tower and > was so eager to do it for him? And then he heard that Scabbers was dead. > Mission accomplished. > > Neri: Again, that would have been a reasonable solution had JKR left us any clue that Lupin heard about Crookshanks chasing Scabbers and especially about Crookshanks finally "eating" Scabbers. But AFAIK no such clue exists. Of course, canon hasn't "refuted" that Lupin heard the trio arguing about it in the corridors, but where is the clue? Without the clue this would be lousy mystery writing. > > Pippin: > The map must have shown Sirius colliding with Harry and going > past him to seize Pettigrew. Lupin would realize then that Sirius > wasn't after Harry. He saw a chance to win his old friend back, provided > that Sirius blamed everything on Pettigrew. But he had to make > sure. > Neri: So ESE!Lupin betrayed the Potters and put Sirius in Azkaban, then he convinced himself Sirius was a DE, then he helped Quirrelmort in SS/PS and Lucius in CoS. Then he set the dementors on Sirius, and now he is ready to sacrifice his new position in order to "win his old friend back"? This isn't the behavior of a consistent character. This is the behavior of a badly-written plot device. > Pippin: > Snape must have already been coming with the potion when Lupin > saw Sirius seize Pettigrew. Lupin would have seen it on the map. > > He left the map open deliberately so that Snape would follow him, > just as he left Harry's cloak lying on the ground. If he hadn't taken > his potion, Dumbledore wouldn't blame him for what the werewolf > did. But Snape and his 'satiable curiosity had to be dealt with. > If he didn't find Lupin in his office, he'd go looking for him anyway. > Neri: I can see perhaps why would ESE!Lupin want Dumbledore to think he forgot to take the potion that night, although he must have realized that he'd lose his beloved job because of it, and I think he would have tried to find another solution. But I can't see why he practically invites Snape, armed and invisible, into all this, when he has to complete such complex and risky operation. Snape is a huge wild card that ESE!Lupin can't control. Snape may go looking for Lupin anyway, but he wouldn't have known *where* to look if Lupin hadn't left him the Map (which is also one of ESE!Lupin's best assets and secrets). Again, ESE!Lupin behaves like a very poor plot device. > > Pippin: > I don't think he did imperius her to fall in love with him. That's why > he feels so guilty about it. And yes, details in Book Seven. > Neri: ESE!Lupin kills muggles spare people and childhood friends, and he feels guilty about Tonks falling in love with him? This inconsistency of character is one of the main reasons why I find it impossible to follow ESE!Lupin. I just can't remember by which set of motives and beliefs he's supposed to act at any given moment. > Pippin: > Are you seriously advancing the convoluted denouements of PoA and > GoF as a reason *not* to expect the denouement of HP7 to be complicated? > Neri: I'm seriously saying that if it took one chapter to explain the convoluted denouement of GoF, then it should take *much* more than that to explain the convoluted denouement of the whole series. Now, this isn't a problem if JKR took the whole series to explain it. For example, a lot of page time was dedicated in HBP to explain the Horcruxes background and Snape's double-agent career. In both of these affairs a few key mysteries were left for the climax of Book 7, I'm sure, but a considerable part of the explanations were already given, and we will probably get more throughout Book 7 before the actual climax. It's designed so any shattering revelation in the climax itself can be explained in several lines without ruining the flow and the suspense. The problem with ESE!Lupin is that in order to work, the revelation must be a big surprise in the climax of Book 7, and only *then* all the explanations for ESE!Lupin's career throughout the whole series can be given. That's very bad news for Book 7. At the very peak of suspense we will have to go through several chapters of ESE!Lupin's convoluted confession in order to find out if Harry comes out alive. > > Pippin: > Um, I guess I don't get why Voldemort would think it was disloyal of > Peter to be saved. > Neri: It wouldn't be disloyal of Peter to be saved, but it *would* be disloyal to show disloyalty and then lie about the reason. Instead of FF, here is the actual canon: ****************************************** GoF, Ch. 1: A slight pause followed - and the Wormtail spoke, the words tumbling from him in a rush, as though he was forcing himself to say this before he lost his nerve. "It could be done without Harry Potter, My Lord." Another pause, more protracted, and then - "Without Harry Potter?" breathed the second voice softly. "I see " "My Lord, I do not say this out of concern for the boy!" said Wormtail, his voice rising squeakily. "The boy is nothing to me, nothing at all! It is merely that if we were to use another witch or wizard - any wizard - the thing could be done so much more quickly! If you allowed me to leave you for a short while - you know that I can disguise myself most effectively - I could be back here in as little as two days with a suitable person -" "I could use another wizard," said the cold voice softly, "that is true " "My Lord, it makes sense," said Wormtail, sounding thoroughly relieved now. "Laying hands on Harry Potter would be so difficult, he is so well protected -" "And so you volunteer to go and fetch me a substitute? I wonder perhaps the task of nursing me has become wearisome for you, Wormtail? Could this suggestion of abandoning the plan be nothing more than an attempt to desert me?" "My Lord! I - I have no wish to leave you, none at all -" "Do not lie to me!" hissed the second voice. "I can always tell, Wormtail! You are regretting that you ever returned to me. I revolt you. I see you flinch when you look at me, feel you shudder when you touch me " ****************************************** Peter lied to Voldy here and got away with it. Harry *isn't* nothing to Peter and we know it. Voldy brags that he can always tell when Peter lies, but he caught him here in the wrong lie. > > Neri: > > as a shattering end-of-the-series-that-is-only-one-book-away revelation, it > > doesn't explains any of what I consider to be the "official" big > > mysteries that must to be solved in the HP saga. > > > Pippin: > Erm, aren't you rather glossing over the Snape debate here? Neri: No, I don't. I included the Snape mystery in my list. And the fact remains: ESE!Lupin doesn't solve a single Snape mystery. > Pippin: > Isn't > it kind of major to determine whether Snape really betrayed Dumbledore > or not? And if he didn't, then someone else ought to be the traitor, and his > saga should be at least as involved and compelling as Snape's, or > the reader will feel cheated. And since the real traitor didn't kill > Dumbledore, he has to have done something equally heinous, > preferably a number of things, in a number of books. There's > really no one else besides Lupin in a position to do that. People > have tried to develop theories for ESE!McGonagall and ESE!Fudge, > but they don't have the gravitas of Lupin, and they weren't > involved in the early days of the Order or the Prank. > Neri: Assuming for a moment Snape isn't the traitor (which right now is hardly a trivial assumption) I'm not aware of any canon that there must be another traitor in the Order. Certain readers who think that the series is primarily a standard mystery tale might feel cheated if there isn't a traitor, but I won't. Perhaps the first books have created an impression that the HP series is built on a formula in which a traitor must be revealed by the end of each book. But in fact, we didn't catch any major traitor by the ends of CoS or OotP, and also not in HBP unless it was Snape. Diary!Riddle was never a character we loved and trusted and Kreacher wasn't either. Come to think of it, Quirrell and Scabbers were also very secondary characters. Actually, judging by this track record the traitor might very well be someone like Mundungus, Flitwick or Diggle. *If* there is a traitor at all. *If* it is not Snape. Too many ifs to constitute a strong argument for me. > Pippin: > The "official" mystery, the one pre-occupying Harry in the middle of > the book, seldom turns out to be a big one...for example in CoS, Harry > is trying to figure out *who* is opening the Chamber, while, as Dumbledore > says, the real mystery is *how*. > > In GoF, Harry mostly worries about how he's going to survive the three > tasks, when in fact his survival is guaranteed, and he should be > wondering who is going to such trouble to see that he wins. > Neri: The question is not so much what is the official mystery for *Harry*, but what is the official mystery for the *reader*. Dumbledore is given the role of presenting the reader with the "how" mystery in CoS, and the true mystery in GoF is presented in the first chapter although Harry himself mostly forgets about it. In any case, changing official mysteries in mid-book is one thing,and changing them in the seventh and last installment of the series is another. > Pippin: > LOL! It seems to me that JKR painted a magnificent target > around Lupin, then handed her readers a bucket of whitewash > and watched them go to work! > Neri: If she is indeed going for ESE!Lupin, then IMO it is JKR herself doing the whitewashing. She is laying a very poorly-written mystery plot centered on an incredibly inconsistent and irrational character. Neri From rkdas at charter.net Mon Jan 23 00:43:15 2006 From: rkdas at charter.net (susanbones2003) Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2006 00:43:15 -0000 Subject: When will the ministry start kicking butt and taking names? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146865 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Kathy King wrote: > > Snow: > > > > Interestingly enough one of the first hesitations Slughorn had with becoming > a teacher at the school was the fact that he didn't want to be seen as a > member of the Order: > > > > "Still the prudent wizard keeps his head down in such times. All very well > for Dumbledore to talk, but taking up a post a Hogwarts just now would be > tantamount to declaring my public allegiance to the Order of the Phoenix! " > HBP pg. 72 > > > > Does this mean that all the teachers at Hogwarts are indeed Order members or > are they seen as such (birds of a feather flock together)? I wandered about > this from the first time I read it. > > > > Slughorn is, undoubtedly a ministry official type of guy, so why would he > have been introduced but to give us information about Voldemort(?) I think > he may have given us a whole lot more; like Lily being one of his all time > favorites despite the fact she was muggleborn. > > > > I wouldn't discard Slughorn so quickly if I were you he is very giving of > information. > > > > Snow > So glad you replied. I meant to mention this previous post but forgot. First, I want to give credit where credit is due. John Granger's excellent paper on HPB has an eye-opening analysis of Slughorn and one of his most intriguing points was that the fake attack that Slughorn set up before DD and Harry go to his house was perhaps a little too good. I don't have my copy of HPB in front of me but I seem to remember that the Dark Mark hung above the house. If I remember my GOF canon corretly, it was only LV's followers who knew how to conjure that mark. I do not trust Slughorn as far as I can spit him. Jen D From stevejjen at earthlink.net Mon Jan 23 01:12:08 2006 From: stevejjen at earthlink.net (Jen Reese) Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2006 01:12:08 -0000 Subject: ESE!Lupin condensed In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146866 Nora: > It remains to be seen how much of the plot JKR loads onto Snape, > after all. I wasn't surprised that he turned out to be the > eavesdropper--that makes good dramatic sense. But she can't do that > much, or things tie up too neatly: Peter being involved helps spread > the load amongst more characters. I got the impression that JKR > telling us who invented Wolfsbane was more of a "Dear fans, Snape > didn't do *everything*, you know" moment than anything else. Jen: I'm wondering about Snape's overall plot purpose, too. I hesitate to say 'red herring' here because Snape's role in Dumbledore's death must be accounted for whether that means Harry's interpretation will hold true or he will learn more information. But Snape's role doesn't appear so back-end loaded to me now as it did immediately after HBP. Realistically, how much *page* time can Snape have? Likely Harry won't see Snape for much of the book. It won't be a situation like Sirius on the run in GOF, where he can believably appear in Hogsmeade to support Harry and provide some backstory for plot purposes. There won't be a reason for Snape to contact Harry and he wouldn't be welcome if he did. All news will be second-hand. Sometimes I wonder if the arc for Snape will end up being a bit mundane. For that matter, that *all* the secondary adult characters will have one last pivotal moment in the sun and then fade to obscurity: Dumbledore's defeat of Grindelwald examined; Peter's life- debt fulfilled; Sirius' death revisited; Snape's moment on the tower unveiled; and Lupin's backstory information about the Potters revealed. And I mean *really* mundane for Snape--no LOLLIPOPS, no more backstory besides the Prank, no reason for turning to Voldemort other than hatred of the Marauders (or some variation), and no great moment for turning back to Dumbledore other than the life debt or the already mentioned feelings of remorse. For me the prophecy was a dud of an explanation even though we had more than enough hints it was coming. I could picture Snape ending up a bit like that--"you mean this is IT?" JKR isn't writing about the adult characters with as much depth as I'd like to read. There are too many of 'em. Spending so much page time on Riddle evolving into Voldemort and revealing the horcuxes storyline makes me think most everything else will drop by the wayside in Book 7, that unless a character has importance to the horcrux search and the final battle they will fall out. Snape's story may have served its main purpose, even if not yet wholly resolved. Jen, hoping she is dead wrong and there are many sizzling mysteries left to be revealed. From gav_fiji at yahoo.com Mon Jan 23 01:17:24 2006 From: gav_fiji at yahoo.com (Goddlefrood) Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2006 01:17:24 -0000 Subject: A Small Aside (Was When will the ministry start kicking butt and taking names?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146867 > Jen D > I don't have my copy of HPB in front of me but I seem to remember that the Dark Mark hung above the house. Goddlefrood Dumbledore actually stated that his main reason for knowing that Slughorn was not under attack was because the Dark Mark was not present over Horace's House. This would be confirmed by Chapter 4 - Horace Slughorn in HBP. Just a little aside, but the misconception that Slughorn conjured a Dark Mark as part of his ruse to fool DD or any other uninvited guest has to be corrected. IMHO there is no concrete evidence that Slughorn was a Death Eater at any stage and I also contend that DD would not have hired him had he ever been one, which DD would have known. From kking0731 at gmail.com Mon Jan 23 01:37:02 2006 From: kking0731 at gmail.com (Kathy King) Date: Sun, 22 Jan 2006 20:37:02 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: When will the ministry start kicking butt and taking names? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146868 Jen D: > So glad you replied. I meant to mention this previous post but forgot. First, I want to give credit where credit is due. John Granger's excellent paper on HPB has an eye-opening analysis of Slughorn and one of his most intriguing points was that the fake attack that Slughorn set up before DD and Harry go to his house was perhaps a little too good. I don't have my copy of HPB in front of me but I seem to remember that the Dark Mark hung above the house. If I remember my GOF canon corretly, it was only LV's followers who knew how to conjure that mark. I do not trust Slughorn as far as I can spit him. Snow: The mark was not set in that instance, which is what alerted Dumbledore to that fact: "My dear Horace," said Dumbledore, looking amused, "if the Death Eaters really had come to call, the Dark Mark would have been set over the house." HBP pg. 64 Snow [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From rkdas at charter.net Mon Jan 23 01:59:50 2006 From: rkdas at charter.net (susanbones2003) Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2006 01:59:50 -0000 Subject: When will the ministry start kicking butt and taking names? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146869 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Kathy King wrote: >> > Snow: > > > > The mark was not set in that instance, which is what alerted Dumbledore to > that fact: > > > > "My dear Horace," said Dumbledore, looking amused, "if the Death Eaters > really had come to call, the Dark Mark would have been set over the house." > HBP pg. 64 > Aw darn. That's what happens when I don't have my book next to the computer. Sorry guys. A rank amateur, I am! Jen D > > > Snow > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] > From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Mon Jan 23 02:03:22 2006 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2006 02:03:22 -0000 Subject: Snape again In-Reply-To: <3FBE7993-8B12-11DA-8D35-000393B04DDE@alltel.net> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146870 Karen: > One thing really struck me tonight and that is that Snape *is* truly > unhinged when it comes to any of the Marauder boys. Sure, he didn't > hear the end of things, but he heard the *real* story of what happened > when he was tricked and that Sirius was the one to blame. That does not > keep him from feeling the same as he always has about Remus. > > What I see clearly here is that this blinding rage is probably the key > weapon that LV used to get to Snape, who was probably a pretty big > recruit on the old DE list. And I suspect that this blinding, > uninhibited anger at the Marauders is merely the set of people that > took the stopper out of his repressed abusive past. The straw that > broke the camels back, as it were, for all other emotional baggage he > carried (similarly to how Snape has become the unfortunate hate vacuum > for Harry over every loss in his life. I mean, effectively, Harry has > about the same amount of reason to blame Snape for every loved one he > has lost as Snape has for blaming the Marauders for every indignity he > ever suffered; LV just thinks everyone owes him because he's a gift to > wizard kind.) We know from HBP that Snape is really gifted. We also > know from other things that he is gifted on many levels. Legilmens, > occulmens, potions....and he was a psyche that was ripe for picking. > > He's almost like a distorted image of Harry and by dint of that a third > version of LV in a way. Both Harry and Snape were raised in abusive > environments, which, makes them really pretty quiet and self- effacing, > at least publicly. Alla: Hi, Karen. I really like your posts whether I agree with them or not and in general I will probably agree with you that there are COULD BE enough similarities between Harry and Snape upbringing, that Snape could be considered Harry's mirror image, although I believe that there seem to be more similarities between Snape and Voldemort and between Voldemort and Harry than between Harry and Snape, but certainly what you write is possible. Except that I think that after HBP the possibility of Snape NOT having abusive past increased A LOT. Eileen was a witch, so isn't it possible that that scene which we all saw in Snape's memories was ONE incident when Tobias learned that his wife is a witch and his son is a wizard? To give the proper credit, I think I read this argument for the first time at June Diamanti's LJ (I think). Yes, one time abuse IS stil an abuse, but really IMO shock and anger which Tobias may have experienced if Eileen did not tell him who she is, MAY have forced him to react violently. It does NOT IMO necessarily show that Snape had an abusive past. he may hve witnessed ONE altercation between his parents during his childhood and remembered it well, because it was UNIQUE. Who knows, maybe after that altercation Tobias and Eileen made amends and lived happily enough. And of course I feel that we missing A LOT of information about Snape and Marauders relationship. YES, we have one scene of ugly bullying, BUT we also have a knowledge know that even in that scene Snape's curse was used against him. No, no, no it does not make the scene less ugly, but IMO as I said in the past it may foreshadow some interesting revelations. So, what am I trying to say? While I certainly see similarities between Snape and Harry, IMO we cannot analogise their reactions to the past simply because we don't have enough information about Snape's past. As to blame, well I know that you said downthread that this is not about justification, but I agree with Allie - I think the analogy may fall, IF Harry has enough reasons to blame Snape for everything and IMO Harry certainly does. JMO of course, Alla From kchuplis at alltel.net Mon Jan 23 02:22:32 2006 From: kchuplis at alltel.net (Karen) Date: Sun, 22 Jan 2006 20:22:32 -0600 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Snape again In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <1BFD3356-8BB7-11DA-919D-000393B04DDE@alltel.net> No: HPFGUIDX 146871 On Sunday, January 22, 2006, at 08:03 PM, dumbledore11214 wrote: > > Alla: > I suppose > Except that I think that after HBP the possibility of Snape NOT > having abusive past increased A LOT. Eileen was a witch, so isn't it > possible that that scene which we all saw in Snape's memories was > ONE incident when Tobias learned that his wife is a witch and his > son is a wizard? To give the proper credit, I think I read this > argument for the first time at June Diamanti's LJ (I think). > Yes, one time abuse IS stil an abuse, but really IMO shock and anger > which Tobias may have experienced if Eileen did not tell him who she > is, MAY have forced him to react violently. It does NOT IMO > necessarily show that Snape had an abusive past. he may hve > witnessed ONE altercation between his parents during his childhood > and remembered it well, because it was UNIQUE. kchuplis: I suppose I think that a lot of Snape's behaviour is explained if that was not an isolated incident. Also, in "booktime" you only have (just as in "movie time") so much time to give background. A scene such as this is one device an author (or director) would use. No, we don't know for sure, but it seems like a logical conclusion. Alla: > And of course I feel that we missing A LOT of information about > Snape and Marauders relationship. YES, we have one scene of ugly > bullying, BUT we also have a knowledge know that even in that scene > Snape's curse was used against him. No, no, no it does not make the > scene less ugly, but IMO as I said in the past it may foreshadow > some interesting revelations. > kchuplis True, entirely true, but I guess that I feel again as though this is a device, like using snapshots that are "time capsules" to give us background. Kind of like little ultimate moments. Certainly Snape had to have gained some new facets to Harry (not that he really cared, but we don't know because by THIS time, they have both given each other legitimate reasons to rub each other raw) that he may not have known previously. It's got to give one better understanding of those people. Even single incidents that are really powerful can affect us in major ways. They can end up influencing even the brightest of people for the rest of their lives. alla: > So, what am I trying to say? While I certainly see similarities > between Snape and Harry, IMO we cannot analogise their reactions to > the past simply because we don't have enough information about > Snape's past. kchuplis Ah, but I am not saying they are mirror images, but like distorted images of each other. I'm not sure I got that across. > Alla: > As to blame, well I know that you said downthread that this is not > about justification, but I agree with Allie - I think the analogy > may fall, IF Harry has enough reasons to blame Snape for everything > and IMO Harry certainly does. > kchuplis: I do think Harry has as much reason for animosity to Snape as Snape does over the marauders (and certainly after the tower, probably more - but consider, Snape could have been Harry's best friend and that scene would have been no less hateful or catastrophic, maybe even more so). The one area I rather disagree is with Sirius. IMO, Sirius would have been there at the ministry to get Harry whether Snape had been goading him for a year or not. I think Harry thinks the same thing. It just makes him even angrier at Snape. From rkdas at charter.net Mon Jan 23 02:24:14 2006 From: rkdas at charter.net (susanbones2003) Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2006 02:24:14 -0000 Subject: ESE!Lupin condensed In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146872 Jen Reese wrote: > > For me the prophecy was a dud of an explanation even though we had > more than enough hints it was coming. I could picture Snape ending up > a bit like that--"you mean this is IT?" > > JKR isn't writing about the adult characters with as much depth as I'd > like to read. There are too many of 'em. Spending so much page time on > Riddle evolving into Voldemort and revealing the horcuxes storyline > makes me think most everything else will drop by the wayside in Book > 7, that unless a character has importance to the horcrux search and > the final battle they will fall out. Snape's story may have served its > main purpose, even if not yet wholly resolved. > > Jen, hoping she is dead wrong and there are many sizzling mysteries > left to be revealed. > I was also left cold the the speed at which Sirius (and his meaning, affect on Harry, the whole arc) was disposed of. I wondered and still do if that is a harbinger of things to come. Usefulness over, character gone and forgotten. She does have quite a bit on her plate without getting in too deep. But I have another question that has been roaming around in my head for a while. I know people have touched on it but I want to talk about this square on if possible. At least one DE has been quite helpful to Harry. Barty Crouch Jr. gave him a thorough introduction to resisting the Imperious curse. I don't think it would be over- stating the case to say that the ability to resist that curse may have been instrumental in avoiding death at the graveyard. It was certainly an important aspect of his survival. Now, if we are to believe ESE!Lupin, and it does have its merits, what are we to think of the Patronus lessons? Another person on the wrong side who does Harry a very important good turn... Of course if Lupin never intended to get caught, it could mean he never intended to have to chose a side and is perhaps in his own convoluted way, not really working for LV. Or is it possible that neither thought Harry'd make it far enough in a confrontation with LV to use anything they'd taught him? Can anyone comment? Thanks, Jen D. From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Mon Jan 23 02:21:01 2006 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2006 02:21:01 -0000 Subject: Draco and Harry (was:The GoF Train Scene - and beyond...) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146873 Betsy Hp: > It's for the best that Harry gets adopted by the Weasleys. The > Malfoys would have been a disaster. Alla: LOLOL. Harry adopted by Malfoys would have been a disaster indeed for the very simple reason that Harry may have not lived to see the next day after the day he was adopted. There is that small matter of Head of the Malfoy's household serving the monster who killed Harry's parents. So, yes, disaster, I agree with you. Betsy Hp: And Ron is much better in the > supporting role than Draco could have been. Alla: Can I change this sentence a bit? Ron is much better in the role of the loyal friends that Draco would have ever been, IMO of course. The kind of friend who will put his life on the line for Harry. Yes, I think Harry is very lucky to have Ron as a friend. Betsy Hp: But I still think a union > between Harry and Draco is needed for Harry to defeat Voldemort. Alla: Union? Maybe, but only in light of HBP events it became IMO a possibility. Friendship, I sincerely doubt it. IMO the best case scenario would be Harry tolerating Draco if he finally decides to join the right side. Betsy Hp: > Gosh, JKR practically came right out and said so during the sorting > in OotP. Alla: I still keep hoping that JKR will introduce a better candidate for good Slytherin among the students. Betsy Hp: > And I do see Draco's and Harry's first meeting as the beginning of a > beautiful friendship. It's the old "hate each other on first sight" > clich?, with all the misspeaking and misinterpretations such > clich?s involve. Alla: Sure, hate each other at first sight is an old clich?, except their hate includes more than misspeaking and misinterpretations. Draco IS indeed on the wrong side. The side that IS eager to torture and kill Muggle and Muggleborns. It is not that Harry is mistaken from the first sight and then sees from different occurrences that Draco is a decent guy, IMO. When, if Draco puts aside the ideology of hate, then I can see a union between them. Again, I CAN see it after HBP, but I certainly don't see it as a definite possibility. Amiable Dorsai: > And Draco was so gracious, too--I mean, I'd be all over a person who, > at our first meeting, bragged about himself, insulted my mother, > insulted my only friend, sneered at my opinion about my only friend, > and then interrogated me to see if my family was good enough to go to > Hogwarts. Alla: Yes, that is the kind of friend I would just LOVE to have . :-) Amiable Dorsai: > Mrs. Weasley and the twins, by contrast, were ever so mean to him > before they knew who he was... Alla: LOLOL. Indeed. But Twins are potential DE, so they do not count as genuine friends and protectors, you know. :-) JMO, Alla From catlady at wicca.net Mon Jan 23 03:32:34 2006 From: catlady at wicca.net (Catlady (Rita Prince Winston)) Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2006 03:32:34 -0000 Subject: Chapter Eight discussion, Snape, ESE!Lupin, quite a few other things Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146874 Carol wrote in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/146527 : << Snape, OTOH, was at Hogwarts when the Potters chose their Secret Keeper. He may have been told by Dumbledore that the Potters intended to make Black their Secret Keeper--he would readily believe the worst about Black--but he couldn't have been told by Voldemort or the Death Eaters. >> Nitpick: he must have been able to some contact with Death Eaters, or he couldn't have spied on them for Dumbledore. << loved your Monty Python quote but thought a gudgeon was a fish >> Gudgeon *is* a fish, one who has a big mouth and a reputation for swallowing anything, and therefore became an ancient slang word for a very gullible foolish person who'll 'swallow' any nonsensical lie. Thus Gladys Gudgeon as the name of Lockhart's most loyal fan. Thus 'gudgeon' as my description of Ministry personnel who believed that Lucius Malfoy was innocent of joining Voldemort's terrorist gang. Geoff wrote in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/146540 : << Within a couple of miles or so or where I live, there is ... Worthy Wood >> Where is Unworthy Wood? Sherry summarized Chapter 8 in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/146545 : << Tonks tells him to hurry, that they have to jump off the train and he hurries after her. Tonks leaps off the train, and Harry jumps off too, staggering a little as he lands. >> << 3. Here we see Tonks jump off a moving train. All through the last book, OOTP, we are shown how clumsy Tonks is. She constantly breaks things or trips over things. It becomes comic relief throughout that book. But here we see her casually leaping off a moving train. What did you think of this? >> It jumped out at me like an alarm had gone off. << We learn later that Tonks has lost her metamorphmagus ability. Do you think her ability to change her appearance could be part of why she is clumsy? Is it possible that she isn't very well coordinated because of her metamorphing? Will she be clumsy again now that she has her ability back at the end of HBP? Or is there something more sinister going on here? Is this really Tonks? >> Tonks had lost both her Metamorphmagus ability and her clumsiness, and no character in the story suspected her of being a Polyjuice imposter despite the warning that the Ministry had sent to every household advising identity questions because of the risk of Polyjuice imposters. No characters mentioned imposters between Arthur and Molly's bit of cuteness and the revelations that Crabbengoyle were Polyjuiced into girls to guard the door of the Room of Requirement. Even if HBP!Tonks was not an imposter, some character should have suspected she was. (And my DH mmediately leered at the thought of teen-age boys taking turns to be Polyjuiced into girls.) Back to Sherry: << Harry remembers that Dawlish is the auror Dumbledore attacked, >> And has not done anything yet to show me that he got Outstanding on *six* NEWTs. << As Harry and Snape walk up to the castle, Harry is overwhelmed with feelings of hatred for Snape, so strong that he wonders why Snape can't feel them. >> But, as we know by the end of HBP that Snape is a Legilimens, he CAN feel them. << 8. Ok, I've been dying to ask this question for months. It's come up once or twice before with no response. Did Snape see that Harry's face was covered in blood? He did have a lantern with him, and when they entered the school there was a lot of light. If he did see it, why didn't he comment or why didn't he realize that Harry had not been late on purpose, that something must have happened to Harry on the way? If you believe he didn't see it, why not, how could he not see it? With all the extra security and all that going on in the wizarding world, why didn't he ask Harry how his face got bloodied? Were his snarky comments to Harry on the walk up to the castle just the usual routine, done to keep up appearances, or does he still seriously hate him so much? >> Snape uses the walk to the castle to torture Harry, guided to the most painful bits by Harry's own thoughts. Even tho', besides being able to see the blood with his lantern, he knows, from Harry's own thoughts, that Harry is this time not guilty of what Snape accuses (deliberately being late on purpose to make a grand entrance). I suppose, in addition to the usual theories that Snape tortures Harry 1) because he hates Harry, or 2) to keep up his cover, Snape might be angry at Harry for hating him about Sirius? << that he would rather die than betray his trust and Ron breaks in to say that it's not saying much, considering NHN is already dead. NHN gets offended and tells Ron that as usual, he has the sensitivity of a blunt axe. >> It seems to me that, throughout HBP, Sir Nick is a little more thin-skinned that in previous books, and that Ron is a *lot* ruder to him than in previous books. Sir Nick is, of course, an expert on blunt axes . << 15. How do you feel about Harry's savage comment that at least it means Snape will be gone by the end of the year? Did Harry's comment about keeping his fingers crossed for another death disturb you? >> I reflexively said: "That's JKR doing down the people who say that Draco proved himself to be evil by saying in CoS that he wished Hermione would die this time." << 17. When Harry tells Ron about the things he overheard Draco saying on the train, we see more doubt on the part of Harry's circle about his suspicions of Draco. Why doesn't Ron believe that Draco is up to anything? >> It's the old story of the boy who cried 'Wolf!' Alla wrote in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/146557 : << There WAS a lot of light, if Snape did not see it when they were in the corridor, he had no way of not catching it when they were in Great Hall. >> But the students at the tables Harry walked passed didn't notice blood on his face, and even Ron and Hermione didn't notice it on first glance. Shaun wrote in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/146641 : << that book (Australian First Aid: The Authorized Manual of St John Ambulance Australia) >> That title makes it sounds as if Australian First Aid is different from everyone else's First Aid. La Gatta Lucianese wrote in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/146653 : << Theodore Nott, I suspect, can see thestrals because his father is a Death Eater, so he has had the opportunity to witness somebody dying, probably rather nastily. (EEK! Do they off people in front of their own kids?) >> JKR said that Theodore Nott's father is an elderly widower. That is, his wife (presumably the mother of his son) is dead. She may be the person whose death Theo-boy witnessed. She may have died of some relatively normal wizarding disease of aging, well-cared for and properly palliated with anti-pain potions, at St. Mungo's (or at home with private nurses) and her whole family gathered around her. She may have died in a sporting accident while her family was in the audience cheering her on. She may have died of a heart attack in her sleep -- if her son was the first to find her body, would that count as him seeing her death? Nuri wrote in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/146655 : << how many know the sword? Harry knows it because he's used it, but I haven't heard anyone else making allusions to it, and though harry's been in DD's office with other people, we've had no account (as far as I remember) of another person turning to admire the majestic sword. >> OoP Chapter 16 : 'And did you kill a Basilisk with that sword in Dumbledore's office?' demanded Terry Boot. That's what one of the portraits on the wall told me when I was in there last year . . .' Pippin wrote in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/146760 : << the Order, and Sirius himself in better times, are opposed to killing >> What is the canon that Sirius himself (in better times) was opposed to extra-legal execution? I feel sure that the idea of private revenge instead of government law enforcement is widespread in the wizarding community, and that Sirius meant to kill Peter *before* Azkaban. PoA Chapter 18: "Peter Pettigrew's dead!" said Harry. "He killed him twelve years ago!" He pointed at Black, whose face twitched convulsively. "I meant to," he growled, his yellow teeth bared, "but little Peter got the better of me... not this time, though!" [emphasis: "I meant to"] << Well, Sirius answered that question for us. It's Voldemort's old supporters that Peter was afraid of, they're the ones who want him dead. >> Ah, back to last week's topic. IIRC it was decided that Voldemort had kept his spies' identity relatively secret (for obvious security reasons) and thus DE Snape hadn't known that Peter was the faithless Secret Keeper, but Bellatrix did know and she was the one that Sirius heard crying out for revenge on Peter. That leaves me wondering whether Peter knew that some surviving DEs knew about him, and whether he realised that some of them would blame him for this debacle and want revenge on him. (If it had occurred to him that it could be thought that he had tricked LV into an ambush, perhaps he could have passed as a live hero, by telling the good guys he had done so on purpose.) Except for ESE!Lupin, I think it more likely that he was hiding from them testifying against him as a plea-bargain (like Karkaroff) than from them killing him. As for why he didn't come out of hiding, all the trouble of selling the Ministry on a tale that 'Sirius Black didn't kill me, he Transfigured me into a rat with amnesia and it took years for me to get over it' would gain him only the need to get a job to pay for food and housing that he got for free as a pet rat. But, y'know, it is my theory that LV didn't go to Godric's Hollow alone. He brought Pettigrew with him -- he must have done, if Pettigrew retrieved and hid LV's wand and robes for future use. (I know you think that ESE!Lupin retrieved the wand and robes, and the alleged JKR quote says 'Wormtail' hid them, but you aren't arguing that LV *didn't* bring Pettigrew to Godric's Hollow). It made perfect sense to me that LV would bring Pettigrew, make Pettigrew walk right in front of him, in case it was a trap, until I found out that LV really is a Legilimens, who would know from Peter's mind that it was not a trap; that leaves revelling in Peter's fear and guilt as sole motive for bringing him. I think he also brought Snape and Lucius with him (because of that dream Harry had in PS/SS). If LV brought both Pettigrew and Snape, then Snape would have known that Pettigrew was the traitor, thus returning him to the place of siccing the Dementors on a man, Sirius, whom he knew to be innocent. Pippin continued in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/146764 : << Peter took advantage of the situation and escaped in rat form, leaving his amputated finger and bloodied robes behind him. >> How did Peter know to cut off his finger just before his enemies shot at him? From kchuplis at alltel.net Mon Jan 23 03:34:44 2006 From: kchuplis at alltel.net (Karen) Date: Sun, 22 Jan 2006 21:34:44 -0600 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: ESE!Lupin condensed In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <32424A8A-8BC1-11DA-904E-000393B04DDE@alltel.net> No: HPFGUIDX 146875 On Sunday, January 22, 2006, at 08:24 PM, susanbones2003 wrote: > I was also left cold the the speed at which Sirius (and his meaning, > affect on Harry, the whole arc) was disposed of. I wondered and > still do if that is a harbinger of things to come. Usefulness over, > character gone and forgotten. She does have quite a bit on her plate > without getting in too deep. kchuplis: I admire the speed and finality of death in these books. They are just very realistic. It gives us, the reader, that same wrenching "left undone" feel that a true close death gives. JKR does not skirt the issue of how final, how scary, how sudden and how empty death is for the living. susanbones: > > But I have another question that has been roaming around in my head > for a while. I know people have touched on it but I want to talk > about this square on if possible. At least one DE has been quite > helpful to Harry. Barty Crouch Jr. gave him a thorough introduction > to resisting the Imperious curse. I don't think it would be over- > stating the case to say that the ability to resist that curse may > have been instrumental in avoiding death at the graveyard. It was > certainly an important aspect of his survival. Now, if we are to > believe ESE!Lupin, and it does have its merits, what are we to think > of the Patronus lessons? Another person on the wrong side who does > Harry a very important good turn... Of course if Lupin never > intended to get caught, it could mean he never intended to have to > chose a side and is perhaps in his own convoluted way, not really > working for LV. Or is it possible that neither thought Harry'd make > it far enough in a confrontation with LV to use anything they'd > taught him? Can anyone comment? kchuplis: I still feel that the ability to throw of the Imperious curse was pretty innate. Crouch DID however give Harry the practice needed. Now, whether BC was trying to break him down or (what did happen) make him better at it, I guess we have to guess. I will say that one of the "dark side" themes in the books seems to be "underestimation". They continually underestimate the "good" guys, considering them weak. Also, consider, had Crouch NOT been caught, he could have gone back to LV loaded with info about what Harry can and cannot do that would help alleviate some of this underestimation. I'm sure he never thought he'd be swiftly sucked up by snack happy dementors. And so are the wages of war. From zgirnius at yahoo.com Mon Jan 23 03:36:33 2006 From: zgirnius at yahoo.com (zgirnius) Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2006 03:36:33 -0000 Subject: Snape again In-Reply-To: <1BFD3356-8BB7-11DA-919D-000393B04DDE@alltel.net> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146876 > > Alla: > > > I suppose > > Except that I think that after HBP the possibility of Snape NOT > > having abusive past increased A LOT. Eileen was a witch, so isn't it > > possible that that scene which we all saw in Snape's memories was > > ONE incident when Tobias learned that his wife is a witch and his > > son is a wizard? > kchuplis: > I suppose I think that a lot of Snape's behaviour is explained if that > was not an isolated incident. Also, in "booktime" you only have (just > as in "movie time") so much time to give background. A scene such as > this is one device an author (or director) would use. No, we don't know > for sure, but it seems like a logical conclusion. zgirnius: Karen, great post to start this thread, I really liked it! I agree with your comment here, but also would like to add that the description of the woman (assuming she was Eileen) suggests this was not an isolated incident. She is described as 'cowering'. As in, 'shrinking back in fear'. A more natural reaction in my view to a first and only instance of being yelled at abuseively by a husband might be to cry, or yell back, depending on one's personality. Shrinking back in fear when someone is shouting seems excessive to me, unless there is prior experience which suggests things could get worse. > Alla: > > And of course I feel that we missing A LOT of information about > > Snape and Marauders relationship. YES, we have one scene of ugly > > bullying, BUT we also have a knowledge know that even in that scene > > Snape's curse was used against him. > > > > kchuplis > True, entirely true, but I guess that I feel again as though this is a > device, like using snapshots that are "time capsules" to give us > background. Kind of like little ultimate moments. Certainly Snape had > to have gained some new facets to Harry (not that he really cared, but > we don't know because by THIS time, they have both given each other > legitimate reasons to rub each other raw) that he may not have known > previously. It's got to give one better understanding of those people. > Even single incidents that are really powerful can affect us in major > ways. They can end up influencing even the brightest of people for the > rest of their lives. zgirnius: And we have evidence of a second incident. Yes, of course Snape had no business being out of his dorm after hours. But Sirius had no business passing on to him the information about how to get by the Whomping Willow either... From geebsy at yahoo.com Mon Jan 23 02:48:59 2006 From: geebsy at yahoo.com (geebsy) Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2006 02:48:59 -0000 Subject: Burrow Wedding Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146877 Not having the time to data-mine the many web-sites and posts I am just wondering if anyone knows why the Fleur/Bill wedding is taking place at the Burrow? Surely Fleur would prefer to have it in her home town; in her own home? Lets face it, the Weasley homestead is not much to look at, and although it is perfect for Harry, does not seem to be the ideal place for the wedding--especially with You-know- Who and The Death-Eaters running around. Roxane From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Mon Jan 23 04:00:19 2006 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2006 04:00:19 -0000 Subject: Snape again In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146878 > kchuplis: > The one area I rather disagree is with Sirius. IMO, Sirius would have > been there at the ministry to get Harry whether Snape had been goading > him for a year or not. I think Harry thinks the same thing. It just > makes him even angrier at Snape. Alla: I decided to clarify my position on list too. I don't disagree with you. Sirius would have been in MoM, Snape or no Snape , simply because he loved Harry, so no argument from me. And Harry mentions that he blames Snape because it is easier than to blame himself. So, if Snape did not give the information on Sirius which he mentions in Spinner's End, he is not to blame for Sirius death, of course. > zgirnius: > Karen, great post to start this thread, I really liked it! I agree > with your comment here, but also would like to add that the > description of the woman (assuming she was Eileen) suggests this was > not an isolated incident. She is described as 'cowering'. As > in, 'shrinking back in fear'. A more natural reaction in my view to a > first and only instance of being yelled at abuseively by a husband > might be to cry, or yell back, depending on one's personality. > Shrinking back in fear when someone is shouting seems excessive to > me, unless there is prior experience which suggests things could get > worse. Alla: I think to learn that your wife is a witch and son is a wizard could be pretty explosive revelation. Again, it does not mean that Tobias should have reacted that way, of course, but such revelation caused Tom Riddle Sr. to leave his wife, you know. I think it is possible to assume that Tobias got pretty mad. What if Eileen used love potion on him too? Oh, and of course there is no way Tobias could have teach little Severus all those dark curses he knew when he showed up in Hogwarts, IMO. So, Eileen or her family are the best candidates, IMO. > zgirnius: > And we have evidence of a second incident. Yes, of course Snape had > no business being out of his dorm after hours. But Sirius had no > business passing on to him the information about how to get by the > Whomping Willow either... Alla: Sorry, on that I entirely disagree. I think and I am really not going to go into all details ( if asked will provide my past posts), but I think we are missing A LOT of information about Prank and since JKR promised more information, I think we are due for some more revelations. I think Prank revelations may show a lot of interesting reasons for Snape/Marauders relationships. But again my point is I don't think that Prank shows anything except that Snape and Marauders hated each other, but not answers Why, so far. Again, since I gotten those types of arguments in the past, just want to say it again - my extreme adamance about us not having NEARLY enough information about Snape/Marauders relationship has nothing to do with liking Sirius a lot and wanting to slap Snape multiple times. Even if the final revelations of the books will show that Snape was an innocent victim of big bad Marauders and never did anything bad to them, I will still think that Sirius paid for the sins of his youth ten times more than he should have paid in Azkaban and will not like him any less I do now. So, I honestly think on pure intellectual level that there are HUGE holes in their past and that snap shots we have seen may show us the distorted picture. I could be wrong of course. JMO, Alla From AllieS426 at aol.com Mon Jan 23 04:08:29 2006 From: AllieS426 at aol.com (allies426) Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2006 04:08:29 -0000 Subject: A Small Aside (Was When will the ministry start kicking butt and taking names?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146879 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Goddlefrood" wrote: > IMHO there is no concrete evidence that Slughorn was a Death Eater at > any stage and I also contend that DD would not have hired him had he > ever been one, which DD would have known. > Allie: I don't believe Slughorn was a death eater, but that wouldn't stop Dumbledore, the king of giving second chances, from hiring him. As long as DD truly believes that someone has changed (SEVERUS SNAPE, anyone?) he certainly will give them a chance. From zgirnius at yahoo.com Mon Jan 23 04:21:02 2006 From: zgirnius at yahoo.com (zgirnius) Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2006 04:21:02 -0000 Subject: Snape again In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146880 > Alla: > > I think to learn that your wife is a witch and son is a wizard > could be pretty explosive revelation. Again, it does not mean that > Tobias should have reacted that way, of course, but such revelation > caused Tom Riddle Sr. to leave his wife, you know. > > I think it is possible to assume that Tobias got pretty mad. What if > Eileen used love potion on him too? > > Oh, and of course there is no way Tobias could have teach little > Severus all those dark curses he knew when he showed up in Hogwarts, > IMO. So, Eileen or her family are the best candidates, IMO. zgirnius: Oh, certainly. I do not doubt Eileen, or perhaps Severus' Prince grandparents, must have taught him some jinxes/hexes before he ever came to Hogwarts. Hence Sirius' comments about his knowledge of the Dark Arts as a first year. This is in my opinion beside the point. It is also possible that Eileen, whose physical description in HBP is unprepossessing, made a love potion to ensnare poor Muggle Tobias. (Why? Who knows...so THAT is why she held on to that Potions text!!) And a combination of these factors might make abusive behavior by Tobias understandable to me on a human level. I was not attempting to suggest that he was the bad guy, and poor Eileen was the good guy. I was attempting to support kchuplis's suggestion that Severus came from a bad home situation. To the young child trapped in that situation, it does not matter who is at fault. It is just not a good way to grow up. > Alla: > > Sorry, on that I entirely disagree. I think and I am really not > going to go into all details ( if asked will provide my past posts), > but I think we are missing A LOT of information about Prank and > since JKR promised more information, I think we are due for some > more revelations. I think Prank revelations may show a lot of > interesting reasons for Snape/Marauders relationships. But again my > point is I don't think that Prank shows anything except that Snape > and Marauders hated each other, but not answers Why, so far. zgirnius: In my opinion, it does not matter WHY Snape and the Marauders hated each other initially. > Alla: > Again, since I gotten those types of arguments in the past, just > want to say it again - my extreme adamance about us not having > NEARLY enough information about Snape/Marauders relationship has > nothing to do with liking Sirius a lot and wanting to slap Snape > multiple times. zgirnius: Oh, I have kind of a soft spot for Sirius myself. He seems (based on my understanding of the Marauders) to have been a really objectionable teenager, but he had a really lousy life as you point out below. And (though you don't point it out) a crummy family as well. And personally I admired his decision to show up at the Ministry. I didn't agree with it...but it did showcase some of his best traits. But this in no way means that his actions towards Snape were not damaging to Snape. From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Mon Jan 23 04:45:07 2006 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2006 04:45:07 -0000 Subject: Dementors In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146881 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "agdisney" wrote: > > Andie: > I was wondering if JKR ever mentioned how Snape would deal with > dementors. In POA Harry drives the dementors away before Snape > arrives & takes him & Sirius to the castle. > In HBP Harry is working on an essay for Snape on the best way to > tackle dementors but he knows that he will receive a low mark > because he didn't agree with Snape's way of doing it. pg 448 US. > > Is there a difference in how a Dark wizard communicates with dementors? > Carol responds: Like everything else we learn about Snape in HBP, this tidbit is ambiguous. It may lead readers predisposed to see Snape as a Dark wizard to see it as additional evidence that he's a Voldie supporter (or, at best, OFH!), but as I'm predisposed in the opposite direction, I see it differently. First, we know that the ability to cast a corporeal Patronus is rare, especially among school-age witches and wizards. It's one thing to cast a Patronus in the ROM among friends and quite another to do it against a Dementor who's in the process of sucking out your happiness and filling you with coldness and despair in preparation for the "Kiss" that will suck out your soul. Even Harry couldn't do it in PoA when he was on the ground with Sirius Black. He could only do it from a safe distance after he had time-traveled (and had already seen himself casting a corporeal Patronus). And he, unlike the other students, had practiced using a Boggart that just happened to turn into a Dementor, a convenient educational aid that the others didn't have access to. Granted, he cast a Patronus (with great effort) on Privet Drive, but only because he already knew he could do it. It's most unlikely that Hermione or Ron or Neville could cast a Patronus if they were alone and confronted by a Dementor or two. And the other DADA students, those who had not been in the DA, would not know how to cast one at all. The whole process of casting a Patronus Charm, which requires first thinking of and focusing on a happy thought when the Dementors are after just that--your happiness--makes it extraordinarily difficult to cast properly just at the moment it's most desperately needed. Snape, whom we discover in HBP really does know a lot about DADA, including the healing incantation that saved Draco from the Sectum Sempra Curse (is the countercurse his own invention like the curse itself?), may well know another means for dealing with Dementors. (I'm quite sure that he's safe from them because he uses Occlumency to block his emotions. Maybe Occlumency is the other means that he suggested. At any rate, given the complications and difficulties involved with casting a Patronus against Dementors, learning another means of protection would seem advisable. And if anyone would know such a means, it would be Snape. Harry dismisses Snape's anti-Dementor lesson because he knows how well the Patronus works for *him* and because he hates and distrusts Snape. But it may be that, like the bezoar Snape mentioned in Harry's very first Potions lesson, this alternate method (which Hermione will certainly remember) will come in handy in Book 7, most likely for Ron or Hermione. In fact, I'm quite sure that it will, or JKR would not have dropped it into the text of HBP. Carol, too aware of JKR's capacity for misdirection to take Snape's "darkness" for granted in HBP or elsewhere From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Mon Jan 23 05:04:10 2006 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2006 05:04:10 -0000 Subject: Snape again In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146883 > zgirnius: I > was attempting to support kchuplis's suggestion that Severus came > from a bad home situation. To the young child trapped in that > situation, it does not matter who is at fault. It is just not a good > way to grow up. > Alla: I understand and I am saying that in light of HBP revelations of Snape's family situation, "Snape's abusive past" IMO became more questionable, that is all I am saying. Is it possible? Of course. Is it less likely to me now? Definitely. > zgirnius: > In my opinion, it does not matter WHY Snape and the Marauders hated > each other initially. Alla: Well, I guess I disagree a lot, IMO if we get the full reasons for their initial hatred , we will learn some interesting answers to many questions, BUT I was actually answering Karen's point about Harry hatred of Snape parallelling Snape hatred of Marauders and being the reason for many events of their lives, if I understood her point correctly. I was saying that we cannot know if the analogies are correct, untill we get full information about Snape's past or at least as much information as JKR decides to give us. > zgirnius: > Oh, I have kind of a soft spot for Sirius myself. > But this in no way means that his actions towards Snape were not > damaging to Snape. > Alla: No it does not, but what it does mean to me is that his actions towards Snape can become much more understandable with few more possible revelations. As I said - I consider the fact that Marauders turned not just ANY curse, but the curse that Snape created against him in the pensieve scene as possible foreshadowing of the full disclosure of their relationships. No it does not change anything in the Pensieve scene, BUT it could be a metaphor, you know for turning Snape's earlier deeds against him. Just speculating here of course and my crow, which I am going to eat is always nice and handy nearby :-) I think that the fact that with ONE book left JKR still promised more information about Prank means that she considers it crucial enough for the Plot purposes ( and no, I don't buy that the plot purpose is to uncover ESE!lupin, so I am working from different premise. Shhhhh, Pippin :-)) Now, WHY would JKR promise more information about Prank if all we were to learn is just to reinforce what we already know that Sirius lured Snape to the Shack. As many people pointed out she has A LOT to deal with in the next book and she still promises more about Prank. It has to be something quite interesting and something we don't know yet, IMO. JMO, Alla From maria8162001 at yahoo.com Sun Jan 22 13:19:13 2006 From: maria8162001 at yahoo.com (Maria Vaerewijck) Date: Sun, 22 Jan 2006 05:19:13 -0800 (PST) Subject: 'Empty' picture at Grimmauld Place (was Re: Locket at Grimmauld Place) In-Reply-To: <20060121210938.39159.qmail@web30803.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20060122131913.94211.qmail@web53203.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 146884 Amanda wrote: >> When I think of Regulus, for some odd reason I keep thinking of the 'empty' picture in the room HP stayed w/ RW at Grimmauld Place that keeps laughing. I have this idea that it is Regulus' picture and we will be hearing from him in book 7. Again, IMO. << maria8162001: I think that empty picture in the room where Harry stayed at Grimmauld Place is the picture fame of Phineas Nigellus, the great grand father of Sirius, who was once a headmaster in Hogwarts. From zgirnius at yahoo.com Mon Jan 23 06:15:14 2006 From: zgirnius at yahoo.com (zgirnius) Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2006 06:15:14 -0000 Subject: Snape again In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146885 > Alla: > I think that the fact that with ONE book left JKR still promised > more information about Prank means that she considers it crucial > enough for the Plot purposes ( and no, I don't buy that the plot > purpose is to uncover ESE!lupin, so I am working from different > premise. Shhhhh, Pippin :-)) > > Now, WHY would JKR promise more information about Prank if all we > were to learn is just to reinforce what we already know that Sirius > lured Snape to the Shack. As many people pointed out she has A LOT > to deal with in the next book and she still promises more about > Prank. > > It has to be something quite interesting and something we don't know > yet, IMO. > > JMO, > Alla zgirnius: Yes, it does. Care to speculate what this might be? I'm honeslty curious if anyone has any other ideas. I've got one I discuss below. One thing that I find very odd about the 'Prank' is Young Snape's actions afterwards. He never reveals Lupin's secret (until PoA, a good 15 to 20 years later), which I find very mysterious. I would have expected him to want his revenge on the Marauders for this incident, and what better way than to reveal Lupin's secret to the school, and the wider world? It would have been completely awful for Lupin, of course, but also, I think, for Sirius, since he would of course bear some responsibility for facilitating Snape in his learning of the secret. And he could have done it under an oh-so- righteous cover of concern for the safety of his fellow students, yada yada yada. I can think of a couple reasons why he might not have done this. First one is Lily. She was a fellow Prefect of Lupin's, and likely had a friendly relationship with him. If as many have speculated she also had some sort of relationship with Snape (and I don't necessarily mean romantic), she might have talked him out of this for Lupin's sake, assuming she meant enough to Snape that he would do this for her. Alternatively, Dumbledore somehow talked him into it. Don't ask me how, but I would not underestimate that guy's powers of persuasion (especially not after the way he handled Draco at the end of HBP). This would establish a previous emotionally significant interaction between Snape and Dumbledore on which their later apparent mutual trust could be built. It would be a reason for Dumbledore not to regard young Death Eater Snape with exactly the same distrust with which he once regarded young Tom Riddle. From duckyslilangel_2 at yahoo.com Sun Jan 22 22:39:20 2006 From: duckyslilangel_2 at yahoo.com (Amber) Date: Sun, 22 Jan 2006 22:39:20 -0000 Subject: Lots of topics -- "Prank"? Lupin as 'betrayer' Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146886 I am still unsure on how to snip properly, so I'm still scared to attempt it. There are a lot of topics I want to cover, so please bear with me. First, reguarding the "prank" what is this? Is it canon or is it just theory? Second reguarding Lupin, I have no clue what the ESE means, but I am finding it very hard to believe that he was the one who caused the betrayal. JKR has given no reason for anyone to belive he is anything other than a friend to the Potters. If I have missed any canon about this, please let me know. I know there were a lot more question I had...but can't seem to remember them right now. It would be better if I knew how to snip, can anyone help me with this? If I do by chance remember what I was wanting to comment about, I will send out another message. "Amber" From Wink45zes at aol.com Sun Jan 22 05:41:20 2006 From: Wink45zes at aol.com (Wink45zes at aol.com) Date: Sun, 22 Jan 2006 00:41:20 EST Subject: Patronus issues Message-ID: <7e.792f9516.31047500@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 146887 bboyminn: >> First we know that the messenger aspect of a Patronus is something conceived and refined by Dumbledore. No one else has figured this out. So, I really don't see any inconsistency; either that or I don't understand your comment. << Wink: Well, Harry (and the readers of the books) have seen Dumbledore send messages via the Patronus, and now in HBP we see Tonks doing it. But where in the 6 published books is it shown or said that this was something conceived and refined by Dumbledore? Book, chapter, and or quote, please. Or do you know this only because JKR said so in an interview or on her web site? Not everyone who reads the books has access to the Internet, or perhaps they are like me, with limited time. I've read the books, once. I know there have been interviews, but I have not read any of them, though I have heard about some of them on group list such as this. I also understand that she has frequently contradicted her own interviews and her books in some of those interviews, (Hermione is the youngest, no she's the oldest of the trio, is one example I know of), leading me to have my doubts how useful or reliable those interviews are. And at the least, everything that needs to be understood should be available in the main body of work. I am working with a young lady who lives in a severely financially challenged situation. She has read a couple of the books which she got from the school library. The school as a few Internet connected computers to serve the whole school, and the public library has some also, but getting there costs money. Unless it is clear in the books, there is no way that I see for this child to understand that this messenger-Patronus is something developed by Dumbledore and used only by the Order. Just because we do not see any one outside the Order of the Phoenix using it does not mean they can't. If it is important to JKR to establish that limit, than it should have been made clear in the books. bboyminn: >> The opposite of 'real-time' is not time travel. . ~SNIP rest of paragraph.#1 List-Elves, please bear with me - there is a method in this madness. bboyminn continued: Apparation, Portkey, and probably Floo travel are not real-time. ~SNIP rest of paragraph #2 bboyminn continued: If Patronus travel in real-time and a Stag can travel at 10 mph, ~SNIP rest of paragraph #3 bboyminn continued: The whole point I was making is that we can't assume Patronus is the standard, common, or preferred method of communication for the Order. I speculated that even under the best of circumstances, Patronus Messenger was reserved for urgent and critical communcation. Routine communication would use routine methods. << Wink: Yes, I must say this is VERY confusing. You spent three paragraphs talking about various means of traveling through space using different amounts of time and how time travel is different (I agree), but then point out that your whole point is really just that this is a mode of communications reserved for urgent or critical communication. Don't see the connection myself, but I'll let that slid. I'm content with believing that Patronuses can go very fast when speed is needed. As for under what circumstances or how often the message-Patronus is actually used, I do think we are far too limited by the "Harry- Filter" to make even a very rough guess. Harry does not, or seems not to see the Auror guards or the members of the Order going about the course of their duties. Just because Harry does not see any of them using the message-Patronus when "reporting in" during their shift of duty does not mean they don't. When we see Tonks use this charm, it is not a a big emergency. It is just a situation where any modern Muggle, finding the automatic gate malfunctioning, would grab their cell phone and call up to the house for some assistance. Based on this, and the fact that there are several Aurors stationed throughout the area, I think it reasonable to think they might use the message-Patronus on a fairly regular basis. The strengths you have pointed out would definitely be useful for people working a security detail. In the books we have seen the actual speed which these Patronuses have actually moved, (at least for short distances), visible to even wizards such as Harry who have not been taught how to do it. Anyone can imagine that these messenger-Patronuses can move at whatever speed they wish, it is only limited by their imagination, and I suppose, by the needs of their personal fanfiction. But I am trying to understand what is happening within the books as written by JKR. (without needing to refer to other sources of information). I am not sure that I would consider the message sent by Tonks to be either critical nor urgent. Just necessary. Apparently there is no bell or knocker at the chained gates, and no one stationed there to guard them or to admit after hours visitors. But hold that thought, for below I discuss a situation that is urgent and critical and the messenger-Patronus is NOT used, and why it wasn't. > bboyminn: > > I suspect that in the instance of Tonks trying to contact > Hagrid or Dumbledore summoning Hagrid to the location of the > Barty Sr attack, there were no messages. The mere presents of > a recognisable Patronus would have cause people to come and > investigate. ... > > Wink: > I daresay that simply pointing in a direction is inadequate > for me. I sure don't have an accurate compass in my head, and > I've yet to see any indication of that talent among wizards. > ...edited... bboyminn: >> You seem to be taking my statements of ASPECTS of Patronus communication as the SINGLE definitive statement of method. SNIP << Wink: I'm sorry you think that. It is an assumption. Yes, I wrote referring to one of the possible aspects of Patronus communication methodology that you put forward. That does NOT mean I saw it as THE SINGLE or DEFINITIVE aspect. It was just one that I saw a weaknesses in, a weakness I thought it important to explore. I commented on that, without adding an "Okay, I can see that" to any of other possible aspects you wrote about. Quite simply I did not think an "I see, I agree that's possible" would pass the List-Elves snippers. One liners of agreement are frowned upon according to the posting rules. Please do not jump to assumptions just because there is a paragraph or ten that I do not reply to. It may be that I actually agree and have nothing to add. Excuse me for exploring the potential weakness in any or all of suggested possible methods or theories. I'm afraid I will continue to do so. bboyminn: >> I gave those two example of situation in which a verbal message would not be necessary. Hagrid seeing Dumbledore's Patronus would have known that Dumbledore would never send it unless there was trouble, so THERE IS TROUBLE, no explanation needed. In the case of Tonk, she may have, but didn't necessarily have to send a verbal message that was intercepted by Snape. She may have simply sent her recognisable Partonus to that Great Hall assuming that is where Hagrid was, Snape saw it and came to investigate. << Wink: Yes, in the case of Dumbledore wanting Hagrid's help in the forest, it is quite possible that the simple appearance and pointing in a direction would be all that is necessary. If it is also used by the security details in and around the school and Hogsmeade, the simple appearance of a calm or a distressed looking Patronus would indeed be all that was needed. However, in the case of Tonks' message it is clear that she did not simply send a recognizable Patronus expecting anyone who saw it to come investigate. It is likely known to the staff of Hogwarts that Tonks is officially assigned to Hogsmeade, and not to the school. Given that we know that any wizard/witch can at least see the Patronus, anyone in the Great Hall looking in the right direction would have seen Tonks' Patronus. Even if only a few know that the appearance of a Patronus means to "come investigate," why is it that on the day when the students are arriving, and the security guards would have a lot to do, and security is a priority, why would only one teacher come strolling down to the gate? I would think, on this day, with all the security concerns, and a student missing, this simple message would have brought several staff members rushing to the gate, ready to Apparate into Hogsmeade, anticipating real trouble. But that is not what happened. Actually I believe we are shown that a real message was in fact sent. Tonks told Harry: "Yes, I'm sending word to the castle that I've got you or they'll worry." Clearly the simple appearance of her Patronus did NOT mean "THERE IS TROUBLE," nor "COME HERE," or "come investigate what this is all about." The Patronus carried a specific message that said at the very least that Harry was with her. Perhaps she let Hagrid (and anyone else) assume that she was outside the gate, or perhaps she added a request that Hagrid come to the gate to let Harry in. We don't know. Personally I think the message was something in the order of: "I've got Harry and he will need to be let through the locked gate." I also note that after Tonks sent the message-Patronus, they had a long walk from Hogsmeade Station up to the school. The length of this walk is emphasized, but even after this long walk they still had to wait at the gate for Snape to stroll down to them. Doesn't sound like he was in a big hurry to see what the trouble was. Nor did he seem to be expecting to rush off into Hogsmeade, which is where Tonks was officially assigned. You suggest that Snape did not intercept the message but simply saw the Patronus and came to investigate. Except that Snape actually says "I took it instead." Clearly, he did not just see a Patronus and decided to go. He TOOK it. The Patronus and whatever message it carried or implied never got to Hagrid, it's intended recipient. We never see Hagrid hurrying down to the gate, why would he, he never got the message. Snape stopped the message from getting to Hagrid. And IF the appearance of a Patronus means simply "come-trouble" why did none of the other staff members go see what Tonks wanted, and why did it take so long for Snape to get to the gate? This implies that there is in fact a more detailed message involved than just understanding that the appearance of a Patronus means 'come and investigate.' I would think that a large Patronus appearing at the staff table in the Great Hall at the Start of Term feast would have been seen by many of the staff, if perhaps not all. Clearly the reason only Snape responded, and waited until he saw them appear at the gate, is that there was a more detailed message and only Snape knew what it was, and he knew there was no need to go rushing off into a cool night. I can just see it in my mind's eye. Snape took the message, with other teachers watching him. He reaches for his wine goblet, raising it to his lips to hide the smirk they now carried. Then, without a word, he calmly walked out of the Great Hall. The other teachers relaxed and returned to their interrupted conversations. bboyminn: >> Everyone was so freaked out at the idea that Snape intercepted a message meant for Hagrid, I thought I would simply point out that we don't know that there actually was a verbal message. Snape may have simply seen the Patronus and that is all he need. << Wink: Whoa! I don't see "everyone" getting "so freaked out" at all! I know that I and perhaps a few others find Snape's interception of this message, verbal or otherwise, to be a detail worthy of interest. It is just the kind of little detail that is often seen in an early chapter of the books and then reappears as a major part of events later. I'm sorry that you see someONE's wish to further explore and define this detail is "everyone [being] so freaked out. . . ." And I think in my above examination of this detail I have shown that there had to have been a more complicated and explicit message than what could have been understood by simply seeing the Patronus. bboyminn: >> Again, my point is that we are making assumptions not in evidence. We know Tonks sent a Patronus, but we don't know that that Patronus contained a verbal message. Tonk may have simply said (mentally/nonverbally) when creating the Patronus 'go to the Great Hall and alert Hagrid'. That is an instruction for action, not a verbal message. If she had framed it as 'find Hagrid where ever he is and tell him 'Harry is waiting at the front gate''. Then the Patronus would have acted differently. I'm not saying that's what she did, I'm saying that since we don't know, we can't make assumptions about the presences and nature of both the instruction and the potential message. << Wink: Well, someone may be making assumptions, but I am working hard at not doing so. We do know that the message contained specific details. We don't know if the message is delivered orally, in written form, telepathically, or is tapped out in a magical Morse Code. Because we are not given any hint as to whether it is verbal, written, whatever, I doubt if the exact method of delivering the message is important, but I do think that it is enough to understand that one is delivered. We Don't know how the Charm is performed. However, we are given the little detail that a message intended for a specific person, went to a place that person was expected to be; delivered its message (to someone else), and then vanished. It never got to the person it was intended for. We can all play with the mental exercise of "It could be this or it could be that" but I'm not sure how helpful that is in understanding what JKR has actually given us. Tonks did not need the headmaster, nor the nurse, or the DADA teacher. She did need someone to come unlock the chain on the gate. So she sent a message to Hagrid, the Keeper of the Keys. (Well, that little detail only took six books to make a reappearance!) If she could have chosen to send the Patronus as person-to person, I think she would have done so. That the Patronus did not go directly to Hagrid indicates to me that a person-to-person-regardless of location - is not an option. Wizards and Witches do not share the ability of owls to 'find' people, and thus cannot give that to their Patronus. So they are limited to sending a message Patronus to a specific location. When possible, even the owls are often given the assist of specific locations such as "the cupboard under the stairs, number 4 Privet Drive," My point is that we should pay more attention to what we are shown to have happened in the book than to what we imagine could have happened. In this case we see the message miss the intended person because it actually went to a place where that person had not yet arrived. No assumptions necessary. bboyminn: >> And elsewhere in my post I gave a more common illustration of a Patronus carrying a verbal message in the voice of the sender. The limitation I set was that the Patronus couldn't engage in dialog; it is like a recording, it simply replays the message it was given. It also does not take a response. All speculation on my part, but speculation toward a workable description of the likely nature of the Patronus; ...the likely nature of a /workable/ Patronus. << Wink: Well, that, at least, is one thing we agree on. The messenger- Patronus is a one way mode of communication. I send mine and get yours in return. Method of communicating the ideas optional per each readers imagination as of yet. bboyminn: >> We know the Order uses Patronus, but we also know, or at least, it seems, that they do not use the routinely. I'm speculating on workable limitation that would put the use of the Patronus in a workable context. << Wink: We may know that members of the Order use the message-Patronus, but again, do we know from the books that this is in fact limited only to the Order? Our knowledge is limited by the "Harry filter" after all. I do think that this would be a handy tool for all the Aurors who are guarding Hogsmeade and Hogwarts to use to report to each other and to Dumbledore. bboyminn: >> I think perhaps were are all over thinking the Messenger Patronus. I would assume that Dumbledore discovered that if he simply made his Patronus appear at a particular location, say the Order Headquarters, the people there would take that as a sign that Dumbledore was in trouble. Next it occurred to him that he could get the Patronus to relay a short verbal message. In a sense, it could act like a recording device, and play back his words to the intended receiver of the message. I don't see this as a complete re-invention of the Patronus. He simply realized an aspect of the Patronus that no one else had ever realized before. << Wink: Whether it is a new invention, a complete reinvention or an adaptation of an old invention is really not the point I was struggling with. At first I could not connect what was known about Patronuses from book three to what is now known. And now what I want to know is exactly what chapter, page, paragraph, lines in the books tells you that Dumbledore worked out this way of using a Patronus and that he has taught it only to the members of the Order of the Phoenix. I must have missed it, because for all I know this is a skill taught in some postgraduate studies, or perhaps in the introductory training for the Ministry of Magic. bboyminn: >> The central theme of everything I've said is that we are making extreme assumption based on ...well ...assumptions. Everyone is up in arms because Snape intercepted a message from Tonks Patronus which had an intended recipient of Hagrid. << Wink: I do wonder why you as so determined to skim past the facts that JKR does give us? And why the apparent need to insult those who want to explore those details? I really don't see anyone "up in arms" or "so freaked out" that Snape intercepted the message. Some group members have explored why Snape would do that, and why he treated Harry the way he did. Snape does not often (if ever?) miss an opportunity to ridicule Harry, and discussing this conflict is perfectly reasonable. For myself, I just want to be clear on the ins-and-outs of all the different ways we have been shown a Patronus can be used, the strengths and weakness which JKR has decided to reveal to us, and what the implications of those revelations could be. I think it is an interesting detail, but I'm certainly not "so freaked out" nor am I "up in arms" about it. bboyminn: >> Well, first you are assuming there WAS a verbal message, Wink: First, I did NOT assume any such thing. I said it could have been verbal or it could have been written. For all I know it could be a tap danced Morse Code. I did note that we have seen one instance where a magical secret was revealed by the handwritten word. But Honestly, I don't think this is the important point. In this we can feel free to use our imaginations. bboyminn continues: >> next you are assuming that Snape heard it. Neither of which is in evidence. Snape became aware of Tonks Patronus and came to investigate, that much speculation we can say with reasonable sureness, but beyond that is unfounded speculation. << Wink: I did NOT assume that Snape heard the message. Snape said that he took the message in the book (EVIDENCE!): From HBP, chapter 8, Snape Victorious, page 160 American Edition: "I meant Hagrid to get the message," said Tonks, frowning. "Hagrid was late for the start-of-term feast, just like Potter here, so I took it instead. And incidentally," said Snape, standing back to allow Harry to pass him, "I was interested to see your new Patronus." Snape TOOK the message INSTEAD. He did not just see it as it passed by on the way to Hagrid. The message was stopped by Snape. Hagrid never got it. Snape took the message and understood what it meant, however the ideas involved were communicated. He knew there was no need to summon additional help, he didn't go rushing to the gate, he didn't arrive at the gate with his wand at the ready, expecting trouble. But, of course, feel free to continue speculating that Snape just saw the Patronus and went, and that Hagrid got the message and just ignored it, leaving his young friend Harry for nasty old Snape to deal with. We are told that Hagrid was only a little late, and Harry and Tonks had that long walk across Hogsmeade and up to the gates, and I do think there is a good possibility that if Snape had not taken the message" instead," then even a slightly late Hagrid could have been waiting at the gate for Harry and Tonks to arrive. But Snape, being who he is, could not keep his abnormally large nose out of other people's business. bboyminn continues: >> On a last note, I seems more than reasonable that the Trio will learn the Patronus Messenger charm in the next book. We knew about Apparation long before we had the details from Harry's point of view. We have known about Patronus Messengers for several books, though mostly through implication. Now in the last book, we will finally get the details. << Wink: It is of course possible that the Trio will learn this charm in the last book. It is also possible that when Harry returns to number 12 Grimauld Place searching for the locket that he will instead find the mate to the small mirror that Sirius gave him. The use of those mirrors seems to me to be a more reliable and secure method of communicating between two people. As you point out, it is common in JKR's books for us to be given hints of things to play out in greater detail much later. In fact, I tend to think we've seen almost all that we will of these message-Patronuses. In chapter 8, I think we were deliberately shown a couple of problems, or limitations, with this charm. We were shown that the message-Patronus goes to a known place, and not to a person of unknown location. And we were shown that these message-Patronuses can be intercepted. (And it is not at all clear from the books just who knows and doesn't know how to use/intercept this Charm.) Why were we shown all of this? Well, I can think of one situation where a message-Patronus without these flaws or limitations would have been very handy: When Dumbledore and Harry return from the cave. Clearly, Dumbledore knew he needed the help that only Severus Snape could give him. But he didn't sent a message-Patronus to Snape, or even to anyone at Hogwarts, when they first emerged from the cave. While distance is not a problem, it may be that Snape could not Apparate to what is to him an unknown place along the seacoast. It seems that you must have at least some knowledge about your destination in order to successfully Apparate. So Harry and Dumbledore return to Hogsmeade, landing near the Three Broomsticks. Dumbledore tells Harry it is Snape that he needs, but he does not send a message-Patronus. Why not? Obviously it is not that the security enchantments on the walls of Hogwarts can stop one, as Tonks has been seen to send one from outside the walls. So, why not send one? I think it important to note as well that it is a rather depressed Tonks that we see using the message-Patronus. That hints that this Patronus charm is not dependent upon holding a strong happy memory as does the "Expecto Patroronum" charm. And even if a happy memory is required, if a depressed Tonks can manage it, surely Dumbledore, who has long savored the good in all things can manage it, even after drinking that depressive potion. So again, why does he not send a message-Patronus to Snape? I suggest it is because he cannot be sure that the message will get to Snape and only Snape. It is late at night, Snape should be in his office or his bed. But he could also be out patrolling the corridors, or somewhere in Slytherin House dealing with a sick student. Or waiting outside Dumbledore's office. Dumbledore cannot be absolutely sure exactly where Snape is, and the message-Patronus cannot 'find' a person, just a location. All of the staff have the same reasons to be someplace other than their offices/beds. Dumbledore himself increased the protections for that night. No one at the school knows where Dumbledore is, so just seeing his Patronus is no help. Even a nudge in the general direction is not very informative, and besides which, Dumbledore is still on the move. And these problems are compounded by the sight of the Dark Mark in the sky. If the Death Eaters have invaded the school, it is quite possible that one or more are seeking out Snape. It would not help anyone for one of them to see Dumbledore's Patronus inside Snape's office, especially before Dumbledore is back in the castle. Until/unless it is stated in the books that only the Order of the Phoenix members know this charm, I think it safer to think of it as more generally known. In addition, now there is the risk that a Death Eater would see a staff member intercepting his Patronus. None of them are above using torture to get information. Dumbledore does seem to expect Snape to be in his bed. Once on the tower he tells Harry to "go and wake Severus." But can he be sure Severus Snape is still there? I would say no, he can't be sure. He can't know exactly where Snape is now, especially if he has responded to the invasion. I think that by the time Dumbledore reaches the Tower he knows that he cannot be sure exactly where any of the staff or guards are. He cannot send a message and have any hope of it reaching Snape. He sends Harry, and then events intrude. I think JKR invented the message-Patronus to serve the story as needed in GOF and OotP. We get a better view of it in action here in chapter 8, HBP. At the same time she has inserted hints as to the limitations of this charm, only to quickly sweep past them with some classic 'Snape is nasty to Harry' stuff. These limits to the messenger-Patronus were necessary for chapter 27 to work. It simply could not be that easy for Dumbledore to reach Snape when he really needed his help. For her story to play out, Snape could not be allowed to reach Dumbledore on the tower until after Draco and the Death Eaters. I applaud how JKR managed this. It is not that Dumbledore forgot about this (his?) very useful charm, but that there were real reasons he could not safely use it. Wink From brahadambal at indiatimes.com Mon Jan 23 08:11:10 2006 From: brahadambal at indiatimes.com (latha279) Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2006 08:11:10 -0000 Subject: A Small Aside (Was When will the ministry start kicking butt and taking names?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146888 Goddlefrood wrote: > > IMHO there is no concrete evidence that Slughorn was a > > Death Eater at any stage and I also contend that DD would > > not have hired him had he ever been one, which DD would > > have known. How come DD didn't know about Peter Pettigrew being a death eater for a whole year before the Potters were killed??? DD need not know everythng that goes on in the WW. Otherwise, all the DEs would have been rounded up with his help!!! There would not have been any need for an Order of the Phoenix, in that case. > Allie: > > I don't believe Slughorn was a death eater, but that wouldn't > stop Dumbledore, the king of giving second chances, from hiring > him. As long as DD truly believes that someone has changed > (SEVERUS SNAPE, anyone?) he certainly will give them a chance. Exactly my point of consideration too. Even if DD knows that Slughorn is a DE and even he has NOT changed, DD would still have hired him IF he saw a weak point which he can make use of to change him over to the good side. Right? Brady. From kelley_thompson at sbcglobal.net Mon Jan 23 07:49:45 2006 From: kelley_thompson at sbcglobal.net (Kelley) Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2006 07:49:45 -0000 Subject: "ESE", 'snipping' (Re: Lots of topics -- "Prank"? Lupin as 'betrayer') In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146889 This message is going to sound like a commercial , but it's a very good opportunity to mention a few of HPfGU's resources, for those who've not seen them yet... Amber wrote: > I am still unsure on how to snip properly, so I'm still scared > to attempt it. There are a lot of topics I want to cover, so > please bear with me. Hi, Amber. I've contacted you offlist, but I also wanted to let others know, should anyone have any questions about any of our posting rules, please do contact the elves at HPforGrownups-owner at yahoogroups.com. We're more than happy to help in any way we can -- that's what we're here for! :-) List members who've not yet seen our posting rules can find them here: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/files/Admin_Files/ Look for "HBF_Text__MUST_READ" (HBF is short for "Humongous BigFile"; this is the welcome message sent to members when they join). The rules are section 2, but please make sure to read section 1 as well, for other important information. > First, reguarding the "prank" what is this? Is it canon or is > it just theory? I've just copied this from the "Sirius" Fantastic Post, Part 1: "[PoA 357] (end of chapter 18) Also at 16, when Remus is in the Shrieking Shack in his werewolf form, Sirius suggests to Snape that if he is so anxious to see where Remus goes every month, he can prod the knot on the Whomping Willow and go down the tunnel after him. Snape goes. Hearing what Sirius has done, James goes down after Snape and stops him before he gets into the Shack, but not before he gets a glimpse of the wolf." So, this is what folks are referring to when they mention 'the prank'. (Or were you asking something else about it?) The Fantastic Posts can be found here, for those interested: http://www.hpfgu.org.uk/faq/ > Second reguarding Lupin, I have no clue what the ESE means, > ESE is short for "Ever So Evil" and describes a character who canon shows to be 'good' but some believe will be revealed in book 7 to be 'evil' after all. There are two places at HPfGU where these sorts of abbreviations are described: The HPfGU_Abbreviations.txt lists the more general shorthands and abbreviations you might come across in this group, in the fandom, or online in general. It can be found in the "Admin_Files" folder in the Files section here on the group (same folder as the HBF). The Inish Alley table in the database section here on the group lists the more HPfGU-specific acronyms you might see mentioned in the discussions -- DDM, OFH, and so on. Easiest to just search the table for the one you're looking for, but the table does sort alphabetically and looking through the various acronyms can be a fun read. ;-) http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/database -- Inish Alley is at the top. Btw, if anyone spots any acronyms or shorthands that need to be added to either list, please let us know! --Kelley From gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk Mon Jan 23 09:12:23 2006 From: gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk (Geoff Bannister) Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2006 09:12:23 -0000 Subject: Chapter Eight discussion, Snape, ESE!Lupin, quite a few other things In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146891 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Catlady (Rita Prince Winston)" wrote: > Geoff wrote in > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/146540 : > > << Within a couple of miles or so or where I live, there is ... > Worthy Wood >> > > Where is Unworthy Wood? Geoff: That was a trifle unworthy of you! Being serious for a moment, The place name "worthy" or more commonly the ending "-worthy" comes from the Anglo-Saxon "worthig" meaning a smallholding. Off the top of my head, I can think of local settlements such as Selworthy, Badgworthy (famous as being the heart of Lorna Doone territory), Elworthy and, in Devon, there are 2(!) places delightfully named Woolfardisworthy. There is also Hamworthy in Dorset and doubtless lots of others. Instead of Unworthy, I could offer you three Unthanks and an Ugley as UK places. Keeping this post a bit more on the rails (it being a frosty and cloudy Monday morning here), about five miles away is a small hamlet called Burrow. It is (w)easley found by turning off the main road a couple of miles west of Minehead and driving through Wootton Courtney. (Ouch.) Ho, hum, back to the real world. From quigonginger at yahoo.com Mon Jan 23 09:46:08 2006 From: quigonginger at yahoo.com (quigonginger) Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2006 09:46:08 -0000 Subject: ESE!Lupin condensed In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146892 Ginger begins: Greetings, Pippin (and all who have interest), As you may know, I have followed ESE!Lupin with great interest, and I believe I have read most of what has been written on the subject. If I am misunderstanding or retreading, please accapt my apologies. I may be confused by unclear pronouns here, but you said: (Pippin) > Lupin was instrumental in the prank, as Snape suspected. After he > left Hogwarts, Lupin joined the Order. Needing an alias to hide > behind while working undercover with the werewolves, he used the > name Wormtail. Later you said: (Pippin) > Lupin then settled for arranging Peter's escape, knowing he would > transform as they were enroute from the castle, calling the dementors > away from the gates and once again endangering > Harry. He then forced Peter to return to Voldemort and cooperate in > the rebirthing scheme. It was he, AKA "Wormtail" who killed Cedric. Now for my confusion: (Ginger) Do you mean to propose that Lupin was in the Graveyard, acting under the name of Wormtail? IOW, it was not Peter who was there at all, but rather a cloaked and hooded Lupin? If this is the case, how do you explain that Harry recognized Wormtail by his missing finger? Said finger being again mentioned when Wormtail cut off his hand. Earlier, in a part that I snipped, you said that it was indeed Peter who cut off his finger. Do you mean to imply that Lupin also cut off one temporarily? What of Pettigrew's silver hand? Or is this now Lupin's new hand? Am I understanding your point wrong? Ginger, under the influence of cold meds, and therefore craving indulgence for any stupidity contained herein. From vuurdame at xs4all.nl Mon Jan 23 09:51:37 2006 From: vuurdame at xs4all.nl (festuco) Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2006 09:51:37 -0000 Subject: Draco and Harry (was:The GoF Train Scene - and beyond...) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146893 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "horridporrid03" wrote: > Interestingly enough, the first question Harry asks Ron is if his > whole family are wizards. He also regrets that he's lived with a > Muggle family and tells Ron how horrible they are. And while > there's no mention of Harry's dead parents, Ron is quite eager to > hear about the night they died. (Ron obviously misses the > connection, as he will in GoF, so I'm not accusing him of cruelty or > anything.) It's interesting to me because Ron's and Harry's > conversation is much like Draco's and Harry's. Family lines and > wizarding purity is covered, the weirdness of muggles is discussed, > and Ron doesn't sympathize with Harry being an orphan at all. The difference is that Ron is interested and Draco is prejudiced. Draco asksing about Harry's parents being the right kind immediately follows that they should not let the other kind go to Hogwarts. The other kind being witches and wizards with Muggle parents, e.g. Harry's mum! Ron is just curious about Harry and his completely different upbringing. Why oh why am I not surprised Harry likes Ron much, much better than Draco and why am I not surprised Draco reminds him of Dudley? Gerry From celizwh at intergate.com Mon Jan 23 14:05:12 2006 From: celizwh at intergate.com (houyhnhnm102) Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2006 14:05:12 -0000 Subject: ESE!Lupin condensed In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146894 pippin: > I know the threads are getting a bit tangled, so I'll > try to summarize a bit. The ESE!Lupin theory states that > Lupin will be revealed as a villain in Book Seven. What > one might call the grand unified version of the theory > is as follows: houyhnhnm: I haven't gotten into the ESE!Lupin theory too much. It's clever and I enjoy all clever speculation, but I haven't been converted. Except that something about Lupin has been bothering me and I don't think anyone else has brought it up. When Lupin was on the train with the Trio at the beginning of PoA, Hermione knew who he was because she saw *Professor* R. J. Lupin "in peeling gold letters" on his suitcase. Where and when was Lupin a professor? Not Hogwarts as far as we know. Durmstrang? From luckdragon64 at yahoo.ca Mon Jan 23 14:40:25 2006 From: luckdragon64 at yahoo.ca (Luckdragon) Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2006 14:40:25 -0000 Subject: Assuming they survive... Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146895 Luckdragon: Any thoughts on what the Hogwarts students will choose for careers after Hogwarts. Harry-DADA Teacher at Hogwarts Ron-Wizard Chess Champion Hermione-magical creature equality rep. at M.O.M. Neville-Healer and discoverer of new medicinal plant properties. Ginny-Hogwarts Flying instructor and Quidditch ref. Arthur-M.O.M. From bartl at sprynet.com Mon Jan 23 15:06:25 2006 From: bartl at sprynet.com (Bart Lidofsky) Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2006 07:06:25 -0800 (GMT-08:00) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: ESE!Lupin condensed Message-ID: <6454713.1138028785614.JavaMail.root@mswamui-billy.atl.sa.earthlink.net> No: HPFGUIDX 146896 Jen: >JKR isn't writing about the adult characters with as much depth as I'd >like to read. There are too many of 'em. Spending so much page time on >Riddle evolving into Voldemort and revealing the horcuxes storyline >makes me think most everything else will drop by the wayside in Book >7, that unless a character has importance to the horcrux search and >the final battle they will fall out. Snape's story may have served its >main purpose, even if not yet wholly resolved. Bart: One of the hallmarks of the whole series is that it has tremendous breadth and very little depth. This tends to be very appealing to younger readers and sometimes frustrating to older ones. Bart From sherriola at earthlink.net Mon Jan 23 16:12:21 2006 From: sherriola at earthlink.net (Sherry Gomes) Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2006 08:12:21 -0800 Subject: fading importance of adult characters In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <000a01c62037$cbe28cf0$0400a8c0@pensive> No: HPFGUIDX 146897 Jen: JKR isn't writing about the adult characters with as much depth as I'd like to read. There are too many of 'em. Spending so much page time on Riddle evolving into Voldemort and revealing the horcuxes storyline makes me think most everything else will drop by the wayside in Book 7, that unless a character has importance to the horcrux search and the final battle they will fall out. Snape's story may have served its main purpose, even if not yet wholly resolved. Jen, hoping she is dead wrong and there are many sizzling mysteries left to be revealed. Sherry now: This is actually a great transition into a sort of overall theory I've had for a long time. JKR has methodically taken away the adults who are important to Harry, in order for him to have the traditional "hero's journey" and all that jazz. i actually was bored with all the back story of Voldemort and the horcruxes in HBP, even though I understood this was the key to Harry being able to defeat him. But I believe the story will come down to being about the kids in the story. The kids will help Harry, betray Harry, sacrifice for Harry. i think the adults will take more of a back seat role. we will have to have some Snape, of course, and I think there will be some Lupin, if for nothing else to give Harry some knowledge about his parents. We have been told there is something significant about the death of Sirius, so we might get more info about him. But i think the adults will be less important to the story than we adult readers might like. Even if RAB is Regulus, he must have been quite young when he stole the locket from the cave, more like the age of the twins perhaps, so again, though from an earlier generation, a young person, not one of the adults. For this reason, and for how it was set up on the tower in HBP, i do think Draco will have more of a role to play. i think he may be the person Harry dislikes that he may have to learn to view differently, and that has already begun. i don't think I see them becoming buddies, and i don't necessarily agree that Draco always wanted to be friends, as Betsy believes. But I think Draco has a role to play, and I think the letting go of the past animosity between Draco and Harry, will be more important than letting go of the hatred between Snape and Harry. The kids are the heroes in the story, and I think their time to shine will be in book seven. I'm not necessarily happy about this either, because I love some of the adult characters. i want more about Sirius and the Potters. I want Lupin to step into the mentor role, or if it's really too late for a mentor, then into the role of adult friend, the bridge between Harry and his parents in a way. The marauders back story is of more interest to me than any other side story or sub plot, and I'd love to know more about their incredible friendship. But I think I'm out of luck, and it will be Harry, his friends and even his enemies in his own age group, who will be the stars in the last book. Sherry From c.john at imperial.ac.uk Mon Jan 23 16:37:19 2006 From: c.john at imperial.ac.uk (esmith222002) Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2006 16:37:19 -0000 Subject: =?iso-8859-1?q?Lord_Voldemort's_Six_Horcruxes=3F_Are_Dumbledore=92s_Opinions_Wrong=3F_(LVs_SHADOW)?= Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146898 According to DD, Voldemort has made six Horcruxes and he confidently identifies four of these Horcruxes. 1. Diary (destroyed) 2. Slytherin's ring (destroyed) 3. Slytherin's necklace 4. Hufflepuff's cup DD then uses guesswork to predict that another Horcrux must be an object of Ravenclaw's (Horcrux 5). DD is also confident that Voldemort was intending to make the final Horcrux with Harry's death. ` I am sure that he was intending to make his final Horcrux with your death. As we know he failed. After an interval of some years, however, he used Nagini to kill an old Muggle man, and it might have occurred to him to turn her into his last Horcrux ' P473 HBP DD therefore predicts that Horcrux 6 must have been Nagini. However, let us look at the timeline for the creation of Voldemort's Horcruxes. If we consider Voldemort during the chapter `Lord Voldemort's request' in HBP. ` Voldemort had entered the room. His features were not those Harry had seen emerge from the great stone cauldron almost two years before; they were not as snakelike, the eyes were not yet scarlet, the face not yet masklike, and yet he was no longer handsome Tom Riddle. It was as though his features had been burned and blurred; they were waxy and oddly distorted, and the whites of the eyes now had a permanently bloody look, though the pupils were not yet the slits that Harry knew they would become ' P413 HBP At this point, it is safe to assume that Voldemort has made his first four Horcruxes. He has certainly gained all four objects by this point and he looks considerably different to the Tom Riddle who called on Hepzbiah Smith. It is also important to note, that he does not look snakelike at this point. In terms of the timeline, the next time we get a physical description of Voldemort is at the end of PS/SS. `Where there should have been a back to Quirrel's head, there was a face, the most terrible face Harry had ever seen. It was chalk white with glaring red eyes and slits for nostrils, like a snake.' P212 PS/SS So Voldemort has now gained his snakelike appearance. So ,in terms of Horcruxes, what happens between the events of `Lord Voldemort's request' from HBP and `The Man with Two Faces' in PS/SS. 1. Voldemort makes a fifth Horcrux. 2. Voldemort enters Godric's Hollow with the intention of making his 6th Horcrux. 3. Voldemort loses his physical body, and lives a spectral existence until his appearance on the back of Quirrel's head. Therefore, when Voldemort appears with Quirrel, logic suggests that Voldemort only has 5 Horcruxes. Voldemort only had 5 when he entered Godric's Hollow, and has not been in a position to make another Horcrux since this point. VOLDEMORT'S SNAKELIKE FEATURES ARE THEREFORE COMPLETELY ATTRIBUTABLE TO HORCRUX 5!! IMO, DD was wrong. Nagini was made a Horcrux before the events at Godric's Hollow ? not after them. It is the Nagini Horcrux that gives Voldemort his snakelike appearance. Nagini is Horcrux 5. So what of Horcrux 6? I do not believe that there is a Horcrux 6 as yet. I believe that Voldemort was trying to secure the prophecy in an attempt to make it his final Horcrux. On learning of the prophecy's destruction, Voldemort attempts to kill Harry ? this does not tally with the theory that Voldemort wanted to use the prophecy to learn how to destroy Harry. With DD gone, I would assume that Voldemort will now turn his attention to the `item of Gryffindor's' and attempt to procure the sword (or hat) from Hogwarts. Perhaps we may even witness the Horcrux making process in book 7 (hopefully unsuccessfully!). Brothergib From zarleycat at sbcglobal.net Mon Jan 23 16:52:34 2006 From: zarleycat at sbcglobal.net (kiricat4001) Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2006 16:52:34 -0000 Subject: fading importance of adult characters In-Reply-To: <000a01c62037$cbe28cf0$0400a8c0@pensive> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146899 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Sherry Gomes": > This is actually a great transition into a sort of overall theory I've had > for a long time. JKR has methodically taken away the adults who are > important to Harry, in order for him to have the traditional "hero's > journey" and all that jazz. But I believe the story will come > down to being about the kids in the story. The kids will help Harry, betray > Harry, sacrifice for Harry. i think the adults will take more of a back > seat role. we will have to have some Snape, of course, and I think there > will be some Lupin, if for nothing else to give Harry some knowledge about > his parents. We have been told there is something significant about the > death of Sirius, so we might get more info about him. But i think the > adults will be less important to the story than we adult readers might like. Marianne: I think this is highly likely, especially with all of the loose ends that are out there. I'm sure that some of them will be tied up very expeditiously, or, if they are not particularly central to the denouement of the story, left to lie as something open-ended. I'm thinking of the Percy story line. Is it important that he reconcile with his family? Whatever the answer, that can be dealt with in a few sentences. If he has no input into the horcrux hunt or to the final Harry/Vmort confrontation, then this whole part of his story may just be wrapped up, checked off the list and be done with. Percy may only be someone who was introduced merely to give some depth and background to the Wizard world, and as a personification of how basically decent people can actively work to uphold a government that needs some basic overhauls. Sherry: > For this reason, and for how it was set up on the tower in HBP, i do think > Draco will have more of a role to play. i think he may be the person Harry > dislikes that he may have to learn to view differently, and that has already > begun. i don't think I see them becoming buddies, and i don't necessarily > agree that Draco always wanted to be friends, as Betsy believes. But I > think Draco has a role to play, and I think the letting go of the past > animosity between Draco and Harry, will be more important than letting go of > the hatred between Snape and Harry. The kids are the heroes in the story, > and I think their time to shine will be in book seven. Marianne: Which may also neatly deal with Redeemed!Snape. Maybe he's not the one to be redeemed; maybe it's Draco. I know JKR said in an interview that she was shocked/surprised that her interviewer suggested there was a redemptive pattern to Snape. Maybe her surprise was not so much that the interviewer mentioned *Snape*, but that the interviewer figured out relatively early in the serires that *redemption* would play a crucial role. Draco may be the one who turns from the Dark Side, which Snape ultimately will fail to do. Marianne From mudblood68 at yahoo.de Mon Jan 23 14:36:20 2006 From: mudblood68 at yahoo.de (Claudia) Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2006 14:36:20 -0000 Subject: Snape again In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146900 > zgirnius: > Yes, it does. Care to speculate what this might be? Yes, here, me! > zgirnius: > Alternatively, Dumbledore somehow talked him into it. Don't ask me > how, but I would not underestimate that guy's powers of persuasion > (especially not after the way he handled Draco at the end of HBP). > This would establish a previous emotionally significant interaction > between Snape and Dumbledore on which their later apparent mutual > trust could be built. It would be a reason for Dumbledore not to > regard young Death Eater Snape with exactly the same distrust with > which he once regarded young Tom Riddle. Claudia here: If somebody talked him out of it, than it must have been Dumbledore (IMO). Now I'm purely speculating here: What if DD promised him that nothing the like would happen again and that he would see to it that they (the Marauders) learnt to be more responsible? A boy like Snape (especially assuming his abusive childhood) would most likely think DD was to inflict some heavy punishment on the boys. Instead DD meant to achieve this by making James Head Boy, hoping this would evoke his inherent better qualities. And also hoping that James would have more control over Sirius than Remus had (who was already prefect by that time.) From what we know how James (and Sirius) turned out in the end, DD's action had the desired effect. But it was a terrible blow on Snape. He probably didn't turn in Lupin then because his anger had turned towards DD and his handling of the "prank". The starting point of DD's attitude towards the redeeming Snape would in this case actually be guilt, for fearing that his actions had partly driven Snape into Voldemort's arms. Claudia From zgirnius at yahoo.com Mon Jan 23 18:32:13 2006 From: zgirnius at yahoo.com (zgirnius) Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2006 18:32:13 -0000 Subject: fading importance of adult characters/Snape again In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146901 > Marianne: > Which may also neatly deal with Redeemed!Snape. Maybe he's not the > one to be redeemed; maybe it's Draco. I know JKR said in an > interview that she was shocked/surprised that her interviewer > suggested there was a redemptive pattern to Snape. Maybe her > surprise was not so much that the interviewer mentioned *Snape*, but > that the interviewer figured out relatively early in the serires > that *redemption* would play a crucial role. Draco may be the one > who turns from the Dark Side, which Snape ultimately will fail to do. zgirnius: Or, if Snape turns out DDM: his role, instead of being something more central to the plot of Book 7, will turn out to be that he saved Draco from the consequences of his bad choice in Book 6, and kept him alive and free to finish making the choice Dumbledore offered him on the Tower. > Claudia here: > Now I'm purely speculating here: What if DD promised him that nothing the like would happen again and that he would see to it that they (the Marauders) learnt to be more responsible? A boy like Snape (especially assuming his abusive childhood) would most likely think DD was to inflict some heavy punishment on the boys. Instead DD meant to achieve this by making James Head Boy, hoping this would evoke his inherent better qualities. > But it was a terrible blow on Snape. He probably didn't turn in Lupin then because his anger had turned towards DD and his handling of the "prank". >The starting point of DD's attitude towards the redeeming Snape would in this case actually be guilt, for fearing that his actions had partly driven Snape into Voldemort's arms. zgirnius again: Oh, that is an interesting suggestion too! And it has the advantage (?) of working well for many flavors of Snape. It would be a fine personal motive for Snape to have always hated Dumbledore...not that I believe this for a moment. And it would have made his action of approaching Dumbledore on behalf of the Potters that much more difficult for him, assuming he was sincere. The poor guy is a master at the nursing of grudges, apparently, it would hurt to have to go to Dumbledore and admit a mistake to him and ask for his help. From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Mon Jan 23 18:42:56 2006 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2006 18:42:56 -0000 Subject: Snape again In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146902 > Claudia here: > If somebody talked him out of it, than it must have been Dumbledore > (IMO). > > Now I'm purely speculating here: > What if DD promised him that nothing the like would happen again and > that he would see to it that they (the Marauders) learnt to be more > responsible? A boy like Snape (especially assuming his abusive > childhood) would most likely think DD was to inflict some heavy > punishment on the boys. Instead DD meant to achieve this by making > James Head Boy, hoping this would evoke his inherent better > qualities. And also hoping that James would have more control over > Sirius than Remus had (who was already prefect by that time.) From > what we know how James (and Sirius) turned out in the end, DD's > action had the desired effect. > But it was a terrible blow on Snape. He probably didn't turn in Lupin > then because his anger had turned towards DD and his handling of > the "prank". > > The starting point of DD's attitude towards the redeeming Snape would > in this case actually be guilt, for fearing that his actions had > partly driven Snape into Voldemort's arms. Alla: Well, that is possible of course, except we have that nugging Dumbledore's "My memory is as good as ever" in response to Snape's "Have you forgotten that Sirius Black tried to kill ME?" ( paraphrase). One can of course read guilt in DD's response, personally I cannot see guilt at all, but something else, something which tells me that Snape could be mixed up to his ears in the events preceding Prank. That is of course also only speculation. There is also that thing of Snape reading question about werewolfs in Pensieve scene being a possible hint ( OR NOT of course) that Snape knew who Remus was BEFORE he went into Shrieking Shack. Speculating is fun, but I cannot wait for JKR to tell us the complete story. Going back to Zgirnius question about who made Snape shut up. I actually never read the suggestion that Lily did and IF LOLLYPOPS of some variety are true,and with every book I am more and more convinced that they are, although after HBP I am thinking of "Ewwwww variety", then I can actually see it sort of. IF Dumbledore made Snape not to tell, then the way I read it, Snape was not completely innocent party before that night. That is just my speculation. If Snape was an innocent party, then actually Lily's request sort of makes better sense for me. JMO of course, Alla From parisfan_ca at yahoo.com Mon Jan 23 19:13:57 2006 From: parisfan_ca at yahoo.com (laurie goudge) Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2006 11:13:57 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Assuming they survive... In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20060123191357.3034.qmail@web30706.mail.mud.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 146903 kinda intresting--I don't see harry as JUST a teacher. I see him as either an auror or an auror who THEN becomes DADA teacher who THEN becomes head master. laurie --- Luckdragon wrote: > Luckdragon: > Any thoughts on what the Hogwarts students will > choose for careers > after Hogwarts. > Harry-DADA Teacher at Hogwarts > Ron-Wizard Chess Champion > Hermione-magical creature equality rep. at M.O.M. > Neville-Healer and discoverer of new medicinal plant > properties. > Ginny-Hogwarts Flying instructor and Quidditch ref. > Arthur-M.O.M. > > > > > __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com From MadameSSnape at aol.com Mon Jan 23 19:12:59 2006 From: MadameSSnape at aol.com (MadameSSnape at aol.com) Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2006 14:12:59 EST Subject: [HPforGrownups] Assuming they survive... Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146904 In a message dated 1/23/2006 9:44:23 A.M. Eastern Standard Time, luckdragon64 at yahoo.ca writes: Harry-DADA Teacher at Hogwarts --------------------- Sherrie here: JKR has pretty much ruled this out. IIRC, it was the Book Day chat where she stated that Harry wouldn't have an academic career. If he survives (with all limbs intact)? Seeker on a professional Quidditch team is about as much excitement as he'd want, I think. Ron - I honestly can't think of anything he'd be particularly suited for. Certainly not a teacher, unless Hogwarts is even more desperate than when Dumbledore hired Lockhart! Hermione - either a professor (though JKR has said that the one who'll become a teacher isn't the one we'd expect), or anything she sets her mind to be. Neville - he'd be the unexpected one as a teacher, eh? Perhaps the school will need a new Herbology professor - though I'd honestly like to see him be the first permanent DADA teacher since Riddle cursed the job. Ginny - aside from being Mrs. Harry Potter and producing the requisite seven children, you mean? I could see her as a professional Quidditch player - but I could also see her, someday, as Minister of Magic. She's got a ruthless streak! Sherrie [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From quick_silver71 at yahoo.ca Mon Jan 23 19:36:28 2006 From: quick_silver71 at yahoo.ca (quick_silver71) Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2006 19:36:28 -0000 Subject: Snape again In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146905 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "zgirnius" wrote: > zgirnius: > Yes, it does. Care to speculate what this might be? I'm honeslty > curious if anyone has any other ideas. I've got one I discuss below. > > One thing that I find very odd about the 'Prank' is Young Snape's > actions afterwards. He never reveals Lupin's secret (until PoA, a > good 15 to 20 years later), which I find very mysterious. I would > have expected him to want his revenge on the Marauders for this > incident, and what better way than to reveal Lupin's secret to the > school, and the wider world? It would have been completely awful for > Lupin, of course, but also, I think, for Sirius, since he would of > course bear some responsibility for facilitating Snape in his > learning of the secret. And he could have done it under an oh-so- > righteous cover of concern for the safety of his fellow students, > yada yada yada. It could be the Snape wasn't so innocent as he proclaims in the Prank incident and he therefore didn't want to rock the boat to much with regards to it. Indeed it could be that if Lupin and Sirius were kicked out then they were going to take Snape with them. Or it could be Snape's pride/ego...the man insists that James was involved in the Prank...almost as if he can't wrap his head around the idea that he was...to use some slang..."owned" by Sirius Black. Maybe Snape didn't want it to get out that Sirius Black, acting alone apparently, utterly tricked Snape (odd...Snape is supposed to be the logical wizard of the two). Quick_Silver From amiabledorsai at yahoo.com Mon Jan 23 19:53:59 2006 From: amiabledorsai at yahoo.com (amiabledorsai) Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2006 19:53:59 -0000 Subject: The Secret Revealed! (Draco and Harry (was:The GoF Train Scene--and beyond...)) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146906 Amiable Dorsai: >Mrs. Weasley and the twins, by contrast, were ever so mean to >him before they knew who he was... Alla: >LOLOL. Indeed. But Twins are potential DE, so they do not >count as genuine friends and protectors, you know. :-) Amiable Dorsai: Yeeessssss Of course! That's it! I've got it! The real spy! The Unseen Manipulator behind Harry's troubles, Voldemort's Right Hand Witch Molly Weasley. It's so obvious, once you see it! Who gave Peter Pettigrew more than a decade of sanctuary? Molly Weasley. Who encouraged her sons and her husband to get close to Voldemort's nemesis? Molly Weasley. Who?dare I say it??weaseled her way into Harry's good graces with gifts of sweaters and fudge? Molly Weasley. Who tried to keep Harry from knowing about Sirius Black? Who showed up ever so conveniently at the Third Task, ostensibly to cheer Harry on, but who could also have been giving the fake Crouch his final marching orders? Who was the first person to agree to join the newly recalled Order of the Phoenix? Who's always there in the kitchen where meetings are held and where idle chatter might reveal all sorts of interesting tidbits? Who wanted to withhold information from Harry, when Harry so desperately needed to know what was going on? Who always has a cup of tea and a sympathetic shoulder for any Order member to cry on, and perhaps say more than they ought? Who gave Harry onion soup so hot it burned his mouth? Forget ESE!Snape, or ESEviler!Lupin. I give you ESEvilest!Molly. Tremble before her! Amiable "Got a new job at the Quibbler" Dorsai From heos at virgilio.it Mon Jan 23 20:03:27 2006 From: heos at virgilio.it (chrusotoxos) Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2006 20:03:27 -0000 Subject: =?iso-8859-1?q?Re:_Lord_Voldemort's_Six_Horcruxes=3F_Are_Dumbledore=92s_Opinions_Wrong=3F_(LVs_SHADOW)?= In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146907 Interesting theory, but I don't like the idea that your appearance becomes horcux-like with time...we don't see LV looking like a cup or a ring, do we? IMO, his snake-like traits are there to show his descent towards spiritual hell, and the least human animal is, in judeo-christian culture, the snake. At this point, LV knows that Harry is a powerful enemy; he wouldn't fight him without the protection of a magical number. What do you say? --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "esmith222002" wrote: > > According to DD, Voldemort has made six Horcruxes and he confidently > identifies four of these Horcruxes. > 1. Diary (destroyed) > 2. Slytherin's ring (destroyed) > 3. Slytherin's necklace > 4. Hufflepuff's cup > > DD then uses guesswork to predict that another Horcrux must be an > object of Ravenclaw's (Horcrux 5). DD is also confident that > Voldemort was intending to make the final Horcrux with Harry's death. > ` I am sure that he was intending to make his final Horcrux with > your death. > As we know he failed. After an interval of some years, however, he > used Nagini to kill an old Muggle man, and it might have occurred to > him to turn her into his last Horcrux ' P473 HBP > DD therefore predicts that Horcrux 6 must have been Nagini. > > However, let us look at the timeline for the creation of Voldemort's > Horcruxes. If we consider Voldemort during the chapter `Lord > Voldemort's request' in HBP. > ` Voldemort had entered the room. His features were not those Harry > had seen emerge from the great stone cauldron almost two years > before; they were not as snakelike, the eyes were not yet scarlet, > the face not yet masklike, and yet he was no longer handsome Tom > Riddle. It was as though his features had been burned and blurred; > they were waxy and oddly distorted, and the whites of the eyes now > had a permanently bloody look, though the pupils were not yet the > slits that Harry knew they would become ' P413 HBP > > At this point, it is safe to assume that Voldemort has made his first > four Horcruxes. He has certainly gained all four objects by this > point and he looks considerably different to the Tom Riddle who > called on Hepzbiah Smith. It is also important to note, that he does > not look snakelike at this point. > > In terms of the timeline, the next time we get a physical description > of Voldemort is at the end of PS/SS. > `Where there should have been a back to Quirrel's head, there was a > face, the most terrible face Harry had ever seen. It was chalk white > with glaring red eyes and slits for nostrils, like a snake.' P212 > PS/SS > So Voldemort has now gained his snakelike appearance. > > So ,in terms of Horcruxes, what happens between the events of `Lord > Voldemort's request' from HBP and `The Man with Two Faces' in PS/SS. > 1. Voldemort makes a fifth Horcrux. > 2. Voldemort enters Godric's Hollow with the intention of making > his 6th Horcrux. > 3. Voldemort loses his physical body, and lives a spectral > existence until his appearance on the back of Quirrel's head. > Therefore, when Voldemort appears with Quirrel, logic suggests that > Voldemort only has 5 Horcruxes. Voldemort only had 5 when he entered > Godric's Hollow, and has not been in a position to make another > Horcrux since this point. > VOLDEMORT'S SNAKELIKE FEATURES ARE THEREFORE COMPLETELY ATTRIBUTABLE > TO HORCRUX 5!! > IMO, DD was wrong. Nagini was made a Horcrux before the events at > Godric's Hollow ? not after them. It is the Nagini Horcrux that > gives Voldemort his snakelike appearance. Nagini is Horcrux 5. > > So what of Horcrux 6? I do not believe that there is a Horcrux 6 as > yet. I believe that Voldemort was trying to secure the prophecy in an > attempt to make it his final Horcrux. On learning of the prophecy's > destruction, Voldemort attempts to kill Harry ? this does not tally > with the theory that Voldemort wanted to use the prophecy to learn > how to destroy Harry. > > With DD gone, I would assume that Voldemort will now turn his > attention to the `item of Gryffindor's' and attempt to procure the > sword (or hat) from Hogwarts. Perhaps we may even witness the Horcrux > making process in book 7 (hopefully unsuccessfully!). > > Brothergib > From mudblood68 at yahoo.de Mon Jan 23 19:56:56 2006 From: mudblood68 at yahoo.de (Claudia) Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2006 19:56:56 -0000 Subject: Snape again In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146908 > Alla: > > Going back to Zgirnius question about who made Snape shut up. I > actually never read the suggestion that Lily did and IF LOLLYPOPS of > some variety are true,and with every book I am more and more > convinced that they are, although after HBP I am thinking of "Ewwwww > variety", then I can actually see it sort of. > > IF Dumbledore made Snape not to tell, then the way I read it, Snape > was not completely innocent party before that night. That is just my > speculation. > > If Snape was an innocent party, then actually Lily's request sort of > makes better sense for me. Claudia: Now this is something that I don't see at all (though from all we know I would easily buy LOLLYPOPS). I have problems seeing Lily ask a favour from a boy she knows has a crush on her. Even if she did ask, what would Snape gain from it? He would do it only, if he thought it would make him look better in her eyes. But in their seventh year, when James became Head Boy and got the girl, what would stop him from speaking out then? Compared to this a Dumbledore makes more sense for me, saying something like, "You don't tell anybody that Lupin is a werewolf and I don't tell anybody that I had to use a very ancient incantation to heal Remus (or James or Sirius) from your Sectumsempras." Well, only 1,5 years of speculation left ;-) Claudia From ceridwennight at hotmail.com Mon Jan 23 20:15:15 2006 From: ceridwennight at hotmail.com (Ceridwen) Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2006 20:15:15 -0000 Subject: The Secret Revealed! (Draco and Harry (was:The GoF Train Scene--and beyond...)) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146909 Amiable "Got a new job at the Quibbler" Dorsai: > Forget ESE!Snape, or ESEviler!Lupin. > > I give you ESEvilest!Molly. Tremble before her! Ceridwen: *g* And aside from all of your other points, who has a daughter that suddenly, OOC, and without warning, became Harry Potter's ideal girl? Who has a son who latched onto Harry from day dot and now shares in all his secrets? Who gives Harry a bed to sleep in during the summers when he might have one of his dreams and talk in his sleep or, conversely, need comfort and a long talk afterwards along with a nice, hot cup of cocoa? Who has Harry Potter's absolute trust and affection? I think it's a family cabal. Because, whose sons were responsible for the DEs having Peruvian Darkness Powder when they got into Hogwarts?.. and whose shop has not been closed down or run out of Diagon Alley despite flagrant tweaking of LV's nose? Whose husband works in the Ministry of Magic, first in Misuse of Muggle Artifacts (getting to know the target group?) and then in (heck, what was it called?) a position to make sure that no so-called bogus (iow, *authentic*) curse-breaking or protective amulets etc. fell into the hands of anyone who might be opposed to LV? Whose one son is now so close to whoever happens to be Minister of Magic in any given book that the poor Minister relies on him completely? Who is going to be at the Dursleys as the last minutes of Harry's blood protection runs out? It has got to be those Weasleys. Sticking their 'dirty little fingers into everybody's pies'. Collecting information. Creating devices to help the Dark forces. Getting close to Harry on two fronts. Not only is Molly LV's right-hand witch, but there's Arthur at his side as well, and the entire red-headed collection of traitors and backstabbers at his feet. You know, we could really make a case for Ultra-Deep-Cover ESEvilest! Weasleys! *g* again, in case anyone thinks I'm serious about this! Ceridwen. From maria8162001 at yahoo.com Mon Jan 23 12:44:25 2006 From: maria8162001 at yahoo.com (Maria Vaerewijck) Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2006 04:44:25 -0800 (PST) Subject: Slughorn -- DE or not? (was Re: When will the ministry start kicking butt and taking names?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20060123124425.57150.qmail@web53203.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 146910 Jen D wrote: > John Granger's excellent paper on HPB has an eye-opening analysis of Slughorn and one of his most intriguing points was that the fake attack that Slughorn set up before DD and Harry go to his house was perhaps a little too good. I seem to remember that the Dark Mark hung above the house. If I remember my GOF canon correctly, it was only LV's followers who knew how to conjure that mark. I do not trust Slughorn as far as I can spit him. < maria8162001: There was no dark mark hanging above the house where Slughorn was staying. That's what gave him away from the pretended DE attack, the lack of the dark mark. As every wizard knows whenever the DEs attack a certain place the Dark mark always hung above, and with Slughorn's case there was none of it. From coverton at netscape.com Mon Jan 23 18:07:48 2006 From: coverton at netscape.com (Corey Overton) Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2006 12:07:48 -0600 Subject: Do any list members think Dumbledore might have asked Snape to kill him? Message-ID: <000001c62047$f28754c0$7f56a4ac@Overton> No: HPFGUIDX 146911 Hi list members, how's it going? Are any list members of the view that Dumbledore might have asked Snape to kill Dumbledore because he was dying anyway? I think Snape killed Dumbledore because he's with Voldemort. Just wondering what people think. Your fellow member, Corey From zgirnius at yahoo.com Mon Jan 23 20:58:50 2006 From: zgirnius at yahoo.com (zgirnius) Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2006 20:58:50 -0000 Subject: Snape again In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146912 > Alla: > There is also that thing of Snape reading question about werewolfs in > Pensieve scene being a possible hint ( OR NOT of course) that Snape > knew who Remus was BEFORE he went into Shrieking Shack. Speculating > is fun, but I cannot wait for JKR to tell us the complete story. zgirnius: Ah, yes. That would be different... > Alla: > IF Dumbledore made Snape not to tell, then the way I read it, Snape > was not completely innocent party before that night. That is just > my speculation. zgirnius: I am so glad you responded to this little question. See, I had not thought of a quid pro quo. That could sertainly be how it went! I had more in mind something like Dumbledore on the Tower with Draco. Basically telling Snape that he would not do something as low as blab Lupin's secret, when he was just a pawn in the whole incident, and Snape going for it. Possibly regretting this later, but feeling obliged to keep his promise. > Claudia: > Now this is something that I don't see at all (though from all we know I would easily buy LOLLYPOPS). I have problems seeing Lily ask a favour from a boy she knows has a crush on her. Even if she did ask, what would Snape gain from it? He would do it only, if he thought it would make him look better in her eyes. But in their seventh year, when James became Head Boy and got the girl, what would stop him from speaking out then? zgirnius: Well, if Lily did not know he had a crush on her (perhaps she believed they had a purely friendly relationship based on their mutual academic interests...) I could see her doing this. Further, I do not think she would view it necessarily as asking a favor. She would see it as what she did in Snape's Worst Memory, I think. Seeing a wrong about to be committed by someone, and stepping in to stop it. Having James make clear his interest in her is not what stopped her in that scene-it was Snape's insult that made her walk away. And I am afraid I can conceive of a sufficiently sappy view of young Snape, whereby in Year 7 (and on past her death) he would still stand by what he had promised her. From geebsy at yahoo.com Mon Jan 23 20:00:05 2006 From: geebsy at yahoo.com (geebsy) Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2006 20:00:05 -0000 Subject: Assuming they survive... -- Ginny In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146913 Sherrie wrote: > Ginny - aside from being Mrs. Harry Potter and producing the > requisite seven children, you mean? I could see her as a > professional Quidditch player - but I could also see her, > someday, as Minister of Magic. She's got a ruthless streak! geebsy: Oh I agree Ginny could be Minister of Magic because of her talents, but I think she is too much like Fred & George to want to jump through the hoops to get there. Maybe if she does end up married to Harry she can skip all the junior minister stuff and jump right to the top. After all, who could stop the Girl-Who-Married-The-Boy-Who-Lived? From gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk Mon Jan 23 21:09:13 2006 From: gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk (Geoff Bannister) Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2006 21:09:13 -0000 Subject: Assuming they survive... In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146914 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Luckdragon" wrote: > > Luckdragon: > Any thoughts on what the Hogwarts students will choose for careers > after Hogwarts. > Harry-DADA Teacher at Hogwarts > Ron-Wizard Chess Champion > Hermione-magical creature equality rep. at M.O.M. > Neville-Healer and discoverer of new medicinal plant properties. > Ginny-Hogwarts Flying instructor and Quidditch ref. > Arthur-M.O.M. Geoff: Perhaps someone can confirm this but I have a feeling that JKR has said that none of the puils will come back as teachers except perhaps one but not Harry. I can't locate it in the various quotes sources Can someone use a "Point Me" spell please? From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Mon Jan 23 21:21:15 2006 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2006 21:21:15 -0000 Subject: How did he know? In-Reply-To: <43D3CFB8.3080903@telus.net> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146915 KJ wrote: > > I'm thinking that Grindelwald had something to do with Riddle's education. I don't think that he made his first horcrux until after he left school. JKR said that Grindelwald's death was important and he is listed as having died in 1945, the year Riddle graduated. We do know that he had made at least one horcrux while working at B&B. He was trying to get someone to tell him how to do it while at Hogwarts. Carol adds: While we don't know for sure that TR didn't make any Horcruxes while he was still at school, I tend to think that KJ is correct; he found out how to do it from Grindelwald before 1945, his last year (or half-year) at school. His graduation (or whatever the British term is) and the defeat of Grindelwald in the same year is probably not coincidence. TR had written the diary (and preserved his own memory in it) before he left for the summer holiday after his fifth year, but it wasn't yet a Horcrux because, as the Slughorn memory (which seems to take place during his sixth year) shows, he didn't yet know how to make one. He managed to kill his parents and grandparents and to take Morfin Gaunt's ring the summer after his fifth year, but as the diary memory shows, he was still only sixteen and had to return to the Muggle orphanage. If he hadn't his disappearance would almost certainly have been investigated. But in the summer between his sixth and seventh years, he was seventeen and free to do as he liked. That would have been the perfect time to visit Grindelwald and learn what he needed to know. If so, he could have made the first two Horcruxes while he was still at school. He did not, however, leave them there. He kept the diary, which he eventually placed in Lucius Malfoy's possession (Lucius was not yet born at this time) and he hid the ring in the Gaunts' hovel. As the change in his appearance at that point indicates, he had made at least one of those two Horcruxes when he obtained the cup and locket for additional Horcruxes and added the murder of Hepzibah Smith to his resume. At that time, he had been out of school only a few years, and, IIRC, he went to work at B and B immediately after graduation in the very year that Grindelwald was defeated. We don't know which month GW was defeated in or how much later he actually died (JKR says that he *is* dead). But I'm guessing that TR had already visited him and learned what he needed to know in the summer of 1944. I very much doubt that TR could have learned to create a Horcrux at Hogwarts using the restricted section of the library or by using Legilimency on Slughorn, as someone on this list suggested. Even if he could read or hear the incantation in Slughorn's mind, and we haven't seen Legilimency work that way (it seems to be primarily visual), I don't think he would know how to *work* the spell. Slughorn claims not to know the incantation, and surely something more than a simple incantation would be required to first remove the soul bit and then to encase it in an object. Not sure where I'm going with this, just that during the summer between his sixth and seventh years (July and August 1944) would have been the perfect time to visit Grindelwald, both because TR was finally of age and because GW was alive and undefeated at that time. Carol, who thinks that Legilimency doesn't reveal everything the Legilimens wants to know, only what's uppermost in the mind of the person being Legilimensed, and that the Legilimens can turn it on and off; he doesn't use it all the time. From gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk Mon Jan 23 21:43:02 2006 From: gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk (Geoff Bannister) Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2006 21:43:02 -0000 Subject: Draco and Harry (was:The GoF Train Scene - and beyond...) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146916 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "dumbledore11214" wrote: > Alla: > > LOLOL. Indeed. But Twins are potential DE, so they do not count as > genuine friends and protectors, you know. :-) Geoff: Being more serious, I would be very suspicious of having the twins as my friends and protectors.I am reminded of the following quote: "God save me from my friends - I can protect myself from my enemies. - Marshall de Villars" I know that Fred and George are supposedly on the side of good but I consider that they are often recklessly dangerous regardless of other people's safety and feelings. We see them in OOTP cheerfully encouraging the First Years to try out their joke products - which they haven't fully tested themselves - for cash despite the fact that some of the youngsters are ill as a result. They leave the Ton-Tongue Toffee near Dudley knowing that he will almost certainly eat one because he is greedy, leaving Arthur to pick up the pieces and restore calm. As young children themselves,they traumatised Ron by transforming his tedyd into a spider and creating the deep-rooted arachnophobia which surfaces in the books from time to time. OIn HBP, we learn that they almost created an Unbreakable Vow involving Ron for heaven knows what pupose if Arthur hadn't interrupted them. They are also guilty of having persistently humiliated and embarrassed Ron - and before him, Percy - with little consideration for their feelings and have also been responsible for being rude to Molly in public. OK, so there are instances of them doing things which were accepted by the others. They gave Harry the Marauders' Map when he needed help in POA and they ran Umbridge ragged in OOTP but that is only the better half of their history. No, I personally would keep them at a very long arm's length if I saw a gleam in their eyes. Beware of red-headed wizards bearing gifts. Just in passing, should you think my last remark was discriminatory, I was red-headed some moons ago.... From jlnbtr at yahoo.com Mon Jan 23 21:55:14 2006 From: jlnbtr at yahoo.com (Juli) Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2006 13:55:14 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Assuming they survive... In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20060123215514.81250.qmail@web53107.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 146917 Luckdragon: Any thoughts on what the Hogwarts students will choose for careers after Hogwarts. Harry-DADA Teacher at Hogwarts Juli: Didn't JKR say on her website that Harry wasn't teaching material? I think Harry will be either an Auror, or as a second choice Quidditch player. >>Hermione-magical creature equality rep. at M.O.M. Juli: I get the equality representative, but Magical Creatures? I only see her interested in Elves, remember she didn't even take COMC in NEWT level >>Neville-Healer and discoverer of new medicinal plant properties. Juli: I HOPE you are right. Neville deserves sooo much. >>Arthur-M.O.M. Juli: In JKR's site (under FAQ) she's asked whethter Arthur will be the next MoM, and she replies "Alas, No" Juli Aol: jlnbtr Yahoo: jlnbtr --------------------------------- Yahoo! Photos Got holiday prints? See all the ways to get quality prints in your hands ASAP. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From kelleyaynn at yahoo.com Mon Jan 23 22:21:39 2006 From: kelleyaynn at yahoo.com (kelleyaynn) Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2006 22:21:39 -0000 Subject: Assuming they survive... In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146918 > Sherrie here: > > JKR has pretty much ruled this out. IIRC, it was the Book Day chat where > she stated that Harry wouldn't have an academic career. Kelleyaynn: Too bad. After all he's been through, and will have to go through, I can't really see him becoming an Auror. I would think after destroying Voldemort he would have had enough of the Dark Arts to last several lifetimes. > Sherrie: > If he survives (with all limbs intact)? Seeker on a professional Quidditch > team is about as much excitement as he'd want, I think. > Kelleyaynn: He is a naturally gifted seeker. If he isn't going to be the DADA professor, I think this makes the most sense. Except that he hates being in the spotlight. Don't know how much privacy he would have as a professional Quidditch player. > Sherrie: > Hermione - either a professor Kelleyaynn: How about an Unspeakable? She certainly has the magical talent. > Sherrie: > Ginny - aside from being Mrs. Harry Potter and producing the requisite seven > children, you mean? I could see her as a professional Quidditch player - > but I could also see her, someday, as Minister of Magic. She's got a ruthless > streak! > Kelleyaynn: Maybe she will become the Auror (since she will not be able to go on the Horcrux Hunt). Then Harry can be a stay at home dad. LOL. From bboyminn at yahoo.com Mon Jan 23 22:30:30 2006 From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2006 22:30:30 -0000 Subject: How did he know? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146919 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "theadimail" wrote: > > I was wondering about how Voldemort could have found about the spell > to make horcruxes eventhough it is supposed to be such a scret and > unmentionable subject. He found it even while he was at Hogwarts, so > how could a teen, no matter how talented, find such a thing without > arousing the interest of Dumbledore who was, as he says, has been > watching Tom Riddle, all the time,during his school days? > > Bye > Adi > bboyminn: Just an additional thought. Others have covered the possibilities nicely, but I want to add one more aspect. Tom was very academically gifted. We could even speculate that his intellect was in the Genius range. Just as Snape was able to invent his own spells, it is possible that Voldemort was able to create his own Horcrux spell using a combination of knowledge of spell language and an understanding of the task at hand. I'm not saying that he didn't use assorted reference books not available to the general public, or that he didn't have help, just that with his obvious intellect, he could have worked out some of the details on his own. Just passing it along. Steve/bboyminn From a_svirn at yahoo.com Mon Jan 23 23:16:30 2006 From: a_svirn at yahoo.com (a_svirn) Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2006 23:16:30 -0000 Subject: How did he know? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146921 > Carol: > While we don't know for sure that TR didn't make any Horcruxes while > he was still at school, I tend to think that KJ is correct; he found > out how to do it from Grindelwald before 1945, his last year (or > half-year) at school. a_svirn: But WHY would Grindenwald share this kind of knowledge with a potential rival? Take Voldemort, for instance, would he teach anyone how to become immortal? Would he show any eager aspirant to the world domination a way to actually achieve it? Not likely I'll bet. He would much rather eliminated the threat while it's still in the bud. From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Mon Jan 23 23:25:38 2006 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2006 23:25:38 -0000 Subject: Snape again In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146922 Alla wrote: > > As to blame, well I know that you said downthread that this is not > about justification, but I agree with Allie - I think the analogy > may fall, IF Harry has enough reasons to blame Snape for everything > and IMO Harry certainly does. Carol responds: I'm not going to argue in depth here because the arguments for Harry's using Snape as a scapegoat for Sirius Black's death have already been presented, and I don't want to get involved in a ping pong thread where neither side convinces the other. So I'll just briefly reiterate. It's *canon* that Harry derives satisfaction in blaming Snape for Black's death, canon that he regrets his own role in it, canon that Harry knows Black is reckless, canon that Snape told Black to stay at 12 GP to wait for Dumbledore. (ESE!Lupin to the contrary, it's also canon that Bellatrix Lestrange killed "the Animagus Black." And even if ESE!Lupin did it, Snape wasn't there.) All that being the case, Harry is placing a disproportionate amount of blame on Snape. Even if Snape's taunts were a factor in Black's presence at the MoM, their contribution to the cumulated events leading to his death is very small. That aside, I really just wanted to ask a question (with a bit of background first). In PoA, Harry violently hates Sirius Black, whom he knows to have been his parents' friend and his own godfather and whom he believes responsible to be for the death of his parents (and the murder of twelve Muggles and another friend of his father's). He later finds out that Peter Pettigrew is the "murderin' traitor," and he regards PP with revulsion, but the violent hatred and the desire to kill the traitor who betrayed his friends is gone. Even after Wormtail murders Cedric on LV's orders, Harry hardly gives Wormtail a thought. As far as he's concerned, Voldemort murdered Cedric. The fact that Wormtail cast the Unforgiveable Curse that killed an innocent boy never quite seems to sink into Harry's brain. Harry has no personal vendetta against him, even though it was Wormtail who tied him to the gravestone, Wormtail who cut Harry's arm with a dagger to get his blood for the potion, Wormtail who resurrected Voldemort. And yet Wormtail, like Black, was his father's trusted friend. Later (in OoP), Harry finds out about the Prophecy and that someone (the eavesdropper) revealed part of it to Voldemort. He has, IIRC, almost no reaction to this information. He certainly doesn't react with the anger he felt against Black earlier when he thought that Black had betrayed his parents. The eavesdropper, as far as he's concerned, is unimportant, just another detail related to the Prophecy. But in HBP, he finds out that this seemingly unimportant person was Snape, and immediately, the murderous rage is kindled again. The actual betrayer, Wormtail, is forgotten, even though Harry had been willing to kill Black for the same crime. Now it's the *eavesdropper* who's "the reason the Potters are dead" (to quote movie McGonagall). Why place *all* the blame on Snape, forgetting the betrayer, Wormtail, and the actual murderer, Voldemort? Because he's Snape (who's already responsible for Black's death in Harry's mind. Why not his parents, too?). Anyway, it seems strange to me that both Black and Snape somehow push Harry's buttons, creating a huge emotional reaction in him that Wormtail, friend of his father or no, doesn't create. Is Wormtail just "vermin," unworthy of hatred, even though his crime is more directly linked to the Potters' deaths than Snape's is, whether or not Snape's remorse is genuine? Why don't his crimes, which are legion, affect Harry in the way that Snape's transgressions, some of them as small as taunting Sirius Black in OoP, do? Yes, I know that Snape is Harry's teacher and that he's sometimes unfair and often sarcastic, but *he* wasn't the Secret Keeper. The Potters weren't *his* friends. As far as Harry knows, *he* hasn't murdered anybody. (DD at this point is still alive.) How does being the eavesdropper somehow go from being nothing at all to a worse crime than revealing the Potters whereabouts to Voldemort? Why is Snape (like Black before him) worthy of hatred and PP isn't? Is it because of Snape's close connection with Dumbledore, which parallels Black's close connection with James Potter? Is it only those points taken from Gryffindor that trigger this violent reaction? If so, why isn't his hatred of Umbridge even more intense than that of Snape, who never imposed such sick, sadistic punishments as Umbridge does? Or is Voldemort somehow behind Harry's passionate hatred of Snape? Does anyone besides me find this strange? It's as if Snape and Harry are somehow linked emotionally, just as Black and Harry were when Harry's hatred was focused on him. Maybe this misplaced hatred is a clue that Snape (unlike Wormtail, who really *is* loathsome and willing to commit any evil deed that saves his mangy skin), isn't the person Harry thinks he is, especially after the events on the tower seem to confirm his view? Not that I think Snape was really James Potter's friend or that he was never a Death Eater or anything along those lines, but I think I see a pattern here. And from where I stand (erm, sit), it points to DDM!Snape, misperceived and mistakenly hated by Harry. Carol, who really needs to resist the compulsion to include every detail and just get to the meat of the matter From horridporrid03 at yahoo.com Mon Jan 23 23:30:46 2006 From: horridporrid03 at yahoo.com (horridporrid03) Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2006 23:30:46 -0000 Subject: Draco and Harry (was:The GoF Train Scene - and beyond...) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146923 > >>Alla: > LOLOL. Harry adopted by Malfoys would have been a disaster indeed > for the very simple reason that Harry may have not lived to see > the next day after the day he was adopted. > Betsy Hp: Hmm, I suspect Lucius would have seen what sort of Dark Lord Harry could have been molded into before he got around to killing. At his most innocent Lucius would have probably used Harry's fame for his own ends. Either way, the Malfoy influence would not have been a good thing. (Heck, I don't think Lucius has been all that great for Draco -- and for all intents and purposes, he seems to love his son.) > >>Betsy Hp: > > And Ron is much better in the supporting role than Draco could > > have been. > >>Alla: > Can I change this sentence a bit? Ron is much better in the role > of the loyal friends that Draco would have ever been, IMO of > course. > Betsy Hp: Personally, I'm leery of judging what sort of friend Draco makes, his loyalty, etc. We've not seen him throw any of his friends over, nor have we seen him abuse any of his friends. I realize the attraction to painting Draco with every "horrible person" description available, but nothing in canon suggests he wouldn't have made a loyal friend. (Actually, Draco has shown himself to have a pretty strong sense of loyalty. He's just had the misfortune to be raised by people on the wrong side.) > >>Alla: > I still keep hoping that JKR will introduce a better candidate for > good Slytherin among the students. Betsy Hp: I was more going by the "Friends with Draco!?! NEVER!!," dramatics Harry went through after the Sorting Hat's song in OotP. It's a pretty huge cue to pass by, IMO. (Also, rather than *a* good Slytherin, I'm betting we'll get an overall sense that there's good in Slytherin. Otherwise JKR would be encouraging prejudice, I think.) > >>Betsy Hp: > > And I do see Draco's and Harry's first meeting as the beginning > > of a beautiful friendship. It's the old "hate each other on > > first sight" clich?, with all the misspeaking and > > misinterpretations such clich?s involve. > >>Alla: > Sure, hate each other at first sight is an old clich?, except > their hate includes more than misspeaking and misinterpretations. > Draco IS indeed on the wrong side. > > It is not that Harry is mistaken from the first sight and then > sees from different occurrences that Draco is a decent guy, IMO. Betsy Hp: Draco makes the mistake of thinking Harry has been raised a wizard. Harry makes the mistake of thinking Draco is just like Dudley. (JKR makes it clear that Draco is nothing like Dudley, beating us over the head with the differences in CoS in case we missed all the clues in PS/SS.) Draco makes the mistake of thinking making fun of Hagrid would amuse Harry (too bad it wasn't Filch peering in the window). Harry makes the mistake of thinking Draco is trying to make him feel stupid. Both boys seem to get the impression that the other boy thinks he's better than him. And both boys are, I believe, wrong. > >>Betsy Hp: > > > > It's interesting to me because Ron's and Harry's conversation is > > much like Draco's and Harry's. Family lines and wizarding purity > > is covered, the weirdness of muggles is discussed, and Ron > > doesn't sympathize with Harry being an orphan at all. > >>Gerry: > The difference is that Ron is interested and Draco is prejudiced. Betsy Hp: Ah, but it's Harry who wants to know all about Ron's blood-lines and it's Harry who talks about how horrible his Muggle family is. If Harry had taken this line of conversation with Draco, Draco would have eaten it up with a spoon. I mean, yes Draco is prejudiced (as he's been raised to be, never exposed to another way of thinking), but again, Harry's conversation with Ron is not all that different from Draco's conversation with Harry. > >>Gerry: > Draco asksing about Harry's parents being the right kind > immediately follows that they should not let the other kind go to > Hogwarts. The other kind being witches and wizards with Muggle > parents, e.g. Harry's mum! Betsy Hp: But Draco doesn't insult Lily on purpose. That's where the misspeaking comes in, I think. If Draco had realized that this was Harry Potter he was speaking to he probably would have asked Harry about the horrors of being raised by Muggles, and Harry would have been glad to fill him in. > >>Gerry: > Ron is just curious about Harry and his completely different > upbringing. Why oh why am I not surprised Harry likes Ron much, > much better than Draco and why am I not surprised Draco reminds > him of Dudley? Betsy Hp: And Draco was merely curious about the boy in the shop. It's just that Ron had a better idea of what questions to ask because he had some idea of who he was talking to. Ron is a lovely person, and he makes a great friend. But he had a leg up on Draco, as it were. And I also think his self-effacement (I'm nothing much, I'm so very poor, I'll probably do horribly at Hogwarts) was much less intimidating than Draco's confident "I am going to *shine* at that school" for Harry, who was so worried about his own chances of success at Hogwarts. And while I'm not surprised Harry equated Draco with Dudley (being so socially isolated it's no surprise Harry saw confidence as a negative trait) Harry does get it wrong. Draco and Dudley have very little in common. > >>Alla: > > LOLOL. Indeed. But Twins are potential DE, so they do not count > > as genuine friends and protectors, you know. :-) > >>Geoff: > Being more serious, I would be very suspicious of having the twins > as my friends and protectors. > Betsy Hp: And they weren't all that great in PS/SS. When Harry lost all those points due to the Norbert incident, Ron stuck by him. But the twins were among those referring to Hary as "the Seeker" during Quidittch practice, leading Harry to consider quitting the team. And I know this makes people laugh (out loud, even ) but I do think it strange that the twins shop can get away with tweaking Voldemort while other shop keepers get disappeared. Betsy Hp From horridporrid03 at yahoo.com Mon Jan 23 23:42:25 2006 From: horridporrid03 at yahoo.com (horridporrid03) Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2006 23:42:25 -0000 Subject: Why Tom left Merope (was:Re: Snape again) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146924 > >>Alla: > I think to learn that your wife is a witch and son is a wizard > could be pretty explosive revelation. Again, it does not mean that > Tobias should have reacted that way, of course, but such > revelation caused Tom Riddle Sr. to leave his wife, you know. > Betsy Hp: Actually, I think Tom Riddle left his "wife" because he finally realized that she'd used either a mind-altering potion or a mind- altering spell to kidnap and repeatedly rape him. Betsy Hp From kchuplis at alltel.net Tue Jan 24 00:25:48 2006 From: kchuplis at alltel.net (Karen) Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2006 18:25:48 -0600 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Assuming they survive... In-Reply-To: <20060123191357.3034.qmail@web30706.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146925 Well, Harry as auror, of course. He's already got a head start on scars. Head, arm, hand. I could see him teaching eventually (no matter what JKR says because, after all, she's not writing anymore Harry books after 7 anyway ) Hermione - lawyer. Ron - Absolutely no idea. Neville, I can definitely see teaching eventually. First he has to get some field experience. Can't you see him tromping through forests and wading through lakes filling pockets with all kinds of specimens? Ginny - well, actually, auror. She's got the spit and gumption and the talent. Why wouldn't she be? She, too, was the victim of a dark wizard. Next to Harry she has the biggest reason to go auror. From kchuplis at alltel.net Tue Jan 24 00:30:20 2006 From: kchuplis at alltel.net (Karen) Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2006 18:30:20 -0600 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Do any list members think Dumbledore might have asked Snape to kill him? In-Reply-To: <000001c62047$f28754c0$7f56a4ac@Overton> Message-ID: <997DB9E6-8C70-11DA-A925-000393B04DDE@alltel.net> No: HPFGUIDX 146926 On Monday, January 23, 2006, at 12:07 PM, Corey Overton wrote: > Hi list members, how's it going? Are any list members of the view > that Dumbledore might have asked Snape to kill Dumbledore because > he was dying anyway? I think Snape killed Dumbledore because he's > with Voldemort. Just wondering what people think. > > Personally, I'm DDM!Snape. I think this was something like "Contingency Plan C". Whether achieved through previous discussion or legilimency or whatever, this was a possibility that came to fruition. To me it is reflective of Ron on the chessboard in PS/SS. Some sacrifices must be made in the chess game of life. We only heard DD about 8 million times (OK, not that many) but several times in the cave stress that he was not as important as Harry. I'll count the next time I read it, but I think he says something to that effect about 3 times. I'd call that foreshadowing. kchuplis From DaveH47 at mindspring.com Tue Jan 24 00:40:05 2006 From: DaveH47 at mindspring.com (Dave Hardenbrook) Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2006 16:40:05 -0800 Subject: =?ISO-8859-1?B?UmU6IFtIUGZvckdyb3dudXBzXSBMb3JkIFZvbGRlbW9ydCdzIFNpeCBI?= =?ISO-8859-1?B?b3JjcnV4ZXM/IEFyZSBEdW1ibGVkb3JlknMgT3BpbmlvbnMgV3Jvbmc/?= =?ISO-8859-1?B?IChMVnMgU0hBRE9XKQ==?= In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <943501936.20060123164005@mindspring.com> No: HPFGUIDX 146927 Monday, January 23, 2006, 8:37:19 AM, esmith222002 wrote: e> VOLDEMORT'S SNAKELIKE FEATURES ARE THEREFORE COMPLETELY ATTRIBUTABLE e> TO HORCRUX 5!! I'm not sure I agree with this -- My theory is that LV's snakelike appearence comes from his use of Nagini's venom as a "dietary supplement" (so to speak) to the Horcruxes -- possibly to better preserve his physical body from destruction. e> So what of Horcrux 6? I do not believe that there is a Horcrux 6 as e> yet. I believe that Voldemort was trying to secure the prophecy in an e> attempt to make it his final Horcrux. On learning of the prophecy's e> destruction, Voldemort attempts to kill Harry this does not tally e> with the theory that Voldemort wanted to use the prophecy to learn e> how to destroy Harry. I agree with you here. Do we know that LV *knows* that he knows only part of the prophecy? Do the DE's in the DoM ever say as much? e> With DD gone, I would assume that Voldemort will now turn his e> attention to the `item of Gryffindor's' and attempt to procure the e> sword (or hat) from Hogwarts. Perhaps we may even witness the Horcrux e> making process in book 7 (hopefully unsuccessfully!). That might be true whether Horcrux 5 is Nagini or something else -- I'm still partial to the idea that he's still shooting for four Horcruxes for four Hogwarts founders. -- Dave From Nanagose at aol.com Tue Jan 24 00:52:50 2006 From: Nanagose at aol.com (spotsgal) Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2006 00:52:50 -0000 Subject: "Professor" Lupin, was: Re: ESE!Lupin condensed In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146928 > houyhnhnm: > > Except that something about Lupin has been bothering me and I don't > think anyone else has brought it up. > > When Lupin was on the train with the Trio at the beginning of PoA, > Hermione knew who he was because she saw *Professor* R. J. Lupin "in > peeling gold letters" on his suitcase. Where and when was Lupin a > professor? Not Hogwarts as far as we know. Durmstrang? Christina: I doubt it - Durmstrang seems much less open-minded than Hogwarts (and way more steeped in the Dark Arts). We are led to believe that Dumbledore is more of an enlightened thinker than most, and even at Hogwarts it is assumed that the parents won't want him teaching there. One possibility is that Lupin has never been a professor before. Maybe the Marauders got him the case as a joke (which would actually be a very funny cementing of Lupin's fanon bookishness). It could have also belonged to a relative who shared the initials R.J. Lupin (Remus's father? Grandfather?). However, given the skill with which Lupin teaches, I'd be surprised if he's never taught before. As anybody that's tried it before can tell you, keeping a classroom full of kids engaged and learning is tough. He seems to be too good at it for it to be just natural talent. Consider this: all evidence points towards Remus getting and then losing many jobs because of his illness ("unable to find paid work because of what I am," it is obvious he is poor, etc). Now, this all seems fine and dandy at first, but it makes me wonder. Most people assume that Remus lost all of these jobs after his employers discovered his secret. I think it's safe to say that everybody in the wizarding world has *some* sort of connection to Hogwarts - even if a wizard doesn't have children of their own, they surely would have relatives or friends with kids. I've always wondered why, in a school filled with the offspring of Remus's supposed former employers, nobody seems to know that he's a werewolf. It shouldn't take long for news like that to spread. I find it hard to believe that a parent didn't get an owl from their child raving about Professor Lupin, say "wait a second," and proceed to Floo all of their closest friends to share their concern. Putting that little puzzle together with the suitcase leads me to believe that perhaps Remus *was* a teacher (or tutor) after all, but in the Muggle world. His lycanthropy would still be an issue because he would be forced to miss work due to illness. If Remus was forced to miss a day of work (and the Lexicon puts that day on a Friday) *with* the Wolfsbane Potion, he must have had to miss more without it. It would have made it very difficult to hold down a steady job. There's my two knuts. I find the letters on the case so interesting, because there's no reason it has to be there. The kids could have just been helped by a nameless man on the traincar, only to find out *later* that he was the new professor. Or they could have asked Lupin who he was after the Dementors boarded the train. Or they just could have figured it out - how many adults travel on the Hogwarts Express? Christina From bboyminn at yahoo.com Tue Jan 24 00:59:07 2006 From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2006 00:59:07 -0000 Subject: Assuming they survive... In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146929 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Luckdragon" wrote: > > Luckdragon: > Any thoughts on what the Hogwarts students will choose for careers > after Hogwarts. > Harry-DADA Teacher at Hogwarts > Ron-Wizard Chess Champion > Hermione-magical creature equality rep. at M.O.M. > Neville-Healer and discoverer of new medicinal plant properties. > Ginny-Hogwarts Flying instructor and Quidditch ref. > Arthur-M.O.M. > bboyminn: While some good ideas, but many are not likely as others have already pointed out. HARRY: Harry has made a substantial financial investment, although he is not aware of it. Based on my own fiction, I suspect the Twins will offer to pay Harry back his Tri-Wizards winning, but Harry will refuse. So, instead, the Twins will make Harry a silent partner in their business. When the famous Harry Potter has tired of Dark Wizard fighting, which I suspect will be very quickly if not immediately, he will join the Twins in running their company. Once he puts his mind to it, I think he will have many brilliant ideas for products. RON: In my own expansion of the wizard world, Ron is indeed a Chess Champion, World Grand Master Chess Champion in fact, but over the years he has invested all his winnings in Weasley Wizarding Wheezes, keeping a small but comfortable amount to live on. Eventually, he will have invested so much money, that he too will become a part owner in the Twins company, and take part in the business. HERMIONE and GINNY: Will open a magical consulting company where they will solve magical problems for various wizarding companies and businesses. On the sly, they will also live modestly and invest in the Twins Company and will become minor shareholder and make a nice income off company profits. NEVILLE: Most likely will become the new Herbology Teacher at Hogwarts. If not that then he will start an Herb and Potions ingredients farm specializing in rare and hard to get items. ARTHUR: While JKR has said that Arthur won't be the NEXT Minister of Magic, she never said that he would NEVER become the Minister of Magic. So while that is a very possible fate for him, I suspect he and Molly will retire early and live off the substantial fortunes of their Sons business venture which I speculate will become the largest Wizarding business in the world and will eventually expand into the muggle market with appropriate muggle products. For the fun of it... several products invented by Harry (mostly) and Ron that have expanded Weasley Wizarding Wheezes - Dragon Flying Boards - Harry's idea, small flying boards, similar to Skateboards, that hover 6" off the ground and are all the rage with the young crowd. Harry Potter's Wizards Brew - All-Natural Suprisingly Strong Ginger Brew (ginger beer or ale depending on where you live - no alchohol). Standard which is strong, Premium which is slighlty sweeter to offset the extra strength which will set your mouth on fire. Harry Potter's Ginger Cream Ice Cream - better than you might expect. Made by Fortescue. Plus monthly variations; raspberry swirl ginger cream, strawberry swirl ginger cream, etc.... Port-Pagers - an ingenious blend of magical portkey and muggle electronics designed by four genius muggle-born wizards. Programable with 25 pre-set destinations. Completely revolutionizes magical travel. This item has the advantage of being able to transport an entire family at once. The Weasley Brothers buy a controlling interest in the company. Side Note: There is a way around the Ministry restriction on Portkeys. Weasley Transport Service (Local) - as long as you have Port-Pagers, why not hire them out as Taxis. Faster and better than the Knight Bus. Weasley Transport Sevices (International) - as long as you are transporting people with your innovative portkeys, why not transport them in groups to any destination in the world. Weasley Travel Service - as long as you are transporting people around the world, why not plan vacations for them; booking Hotels, giving tours, providing personal quides, etc.... Harry Potter's Emerald Eyes Gin - Harry discovers this long forgotten Wizard's gin that is smooth like London style gin but full flavored like Dutch gin, and buys the company, revitalizing it under his own brand name. Ron Weasley Chess Boards - Standard, Deluxe, Premium, and Custom. The big money is in the custom made boards which soon become collectors items. Boards are a copy of McGonagall's Philosopher's Stone chess set. Autographed by Ron, Harry, Hermione, and McGonagall all of whom get a share of the profits. Plus an assortment of other food items like - Ron Weasleys Red Hot Meat Sticks (think Slim Jims, or ginger spiced pepperoni), assorted ginger flavor products like Harry's Ginger spice mustard, Ginger feed - cured - glazed Hams, etc... Assorted personal care and cleaning products. Can't get into this in details in a public forum - Harry Potter's Magic Soap, Shampoo, Conditioner, lotion, etc.... Several assorted Broom innovations in cooperation with Comet broom company. The Rubeus Giant Broom - a broom custom made for Hagrid (birthday present from Harry and Ron) that catches on for mass transport and cargo hauling. When combined with the Rubeus carriage, it make the perfect family transportation; much better than magic carpets. Hargid gets royalties on the invention of the Rubeus Carriage. Harry Potter Publishing - Harry, Ron, and Hermione tell their story to the world in seven volumes. Though the books are ghost written from notse made by the Trio by a ghost writer call Joanne Ro... 'Just call me Jo, everybody does'. Oh yeah... Ron and Harry buy the Chudley Cannons and as a direct result of doing that, they take over the food and drink concessions at all the national Quidditch Stadiums. Food which now includes Chocolate dipped ginger cream on a stick. Yes... yes... I know this has nothing to do with JKR's world, but it shows the potential for Harry and Weasley Wizarding Wheezes. I really think that Fred and George's company will be Harry's saving grace in the future. When this war is over, Harry, I really believe, is going to have had his fill of danger and dark wizard fighting, so working for Fred and George will be a safe relaxing way to spend the rest of his life. Just having some fun. Steve/bboyminn From foxmoth at qnet.com Tue Jan 24 01:06:11 2006 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2006 01:06:11 -0000 Subject: ESE!Lupin condensed and Lupin and Sirius replies In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146930 > Neri: > But in a well-written mystery plot the author is supposed to give us > proper clues. Snape blamed the prank on all the Marauders and > especially on James, so if his suspicion was supposed to point at > ESE!Lupin it was a poorly written clue. Pippin: JKR points up Snape's suspicions about Lupin: "So that's why Snape doesn't like you," said Harry slowly, "because he thought you were in on the joke?" "That's right," sneered a cold voice from the wall behind Lupin. PoA ch 18 I don't recall any canon that Snape suspects Pettigrew is involved so I don't see how we know that Snape blamed the prank on all the marauders. We're told that he suspected James because he hated James and was jealous of him, but where is the canon that he only suspected Lupin because he hated him? Canon is the reverse: he hated Lupin because he suspected him! You're welcome to think the ESE!Lupin clues inadequate and overly reliant on reader speculation, but they're perfectly in line with the sorts of clues JKR has offered for other mysteries. What clues do we have for Barty Crouch Jr? The only clue that Barty has the same name as his father is that Tom Riddle has the same name as *his* father. The only clue that Barty's death has been faked is that Peter Pettigrew faked *his* death. The only clue that he escaped from Azkaban is that Sirius managed it. The only clue that he's using polyjuice potion to hide his identity is Snape's reference to missing boomslang skin, but there's no way to tell that Snape is referring to a recent burglary, not the one that took place two years before. There's no hint that Fake!Moody's flask contains a potion, no cabbage-y smell or anything like that. None of this would be enough to implicate Fake!Moody by itself. You have to look at the way he acts for that. The way Lupin acts ought to be enough to draw suspicion on him. He's willing to kill in cold blood. I've heard any number of excuses for it -- he was temporarily unhinged by Pettigrew's reappearance, he was following some old WW tradition of revenge killings, he'd lost faith in wizarding justice, he was blindly obedient to Sirius. All purely speculative, contra-canonical and highly convoluted, IMO, when all the time there's a simple but heartbreaking answer: he's a killer. Not a brutal, psychotic or indiscriminate killer, but one who chose to kill when he had to choose between what was right and what was easy. I fail to see why the first six books of the series should be concerned with spies, traitors and mysteries, but not the last. You don't have to *read* them for the mystery plots, but they're definitely there. How else are we to explain JKR's constant references to clues and red herrings when she discusses her work? You are welcome to think it's no mystery and Snape is the traitor, but if it isn't, why should JKR have refused to say that he's evil? What's the point? And as for proper clues, I think that if the body of the deceased has fresh blood on it a considerable interval of time after it's supposed to have died of a curse that doesn't leave any trace -- well, if that's not meant to be a clue, then JKR *is* a terrible mystery writer. Pippin From amiabledorsai at yahoo.com Tue Jan 24 01:10:49 2006 From: amiabledorsai at yahoo.com (amiabledorsai) Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2006 01:10:49 -0000 Subject: Snape again In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146931 > Carol responds: > All that being the case, Harry is placing a disproportionate > amount of blame on Snape. Even if Snape's taunts were a factor > in Black's presence at the MoM, their contribution to the > cumulated events leading to his death is very small. >Even after Wormtail murders Cedric on LV's orders, Harry hardly > gives Wormtail a thought. As far as he's concerned, Voldemort > murdered Cedric. > Later (in OoP), Harry finds out about the Prophecy and that someone > (the eavesdropper) revealed part of it to Voldemort. He has, IIRC, > almost no reaction to this information... >But in HBP, he finds out that this seemingly unimportant > person was Snape, and immediately, the murderous rage is kindled > again. The actual betrayer, Wormtail, is forgotten... > How does being the eavesdropper somehow go from being nothing > at all to a worse crime than revealing the Potters whereabouts to > Voldemort? I'm pretty sure that if Harry could get his hands on Peter, Buckbeak would soon be having rat fricassee for lunch. I doubt that Harry has forgotten Peter's crimes. But Peter isn't an immediate problem. Peter isn't sitting in authority over Harry, giving him exaggerated punishments for pretended (and, yes, some real) infractions. Peter hasn't piled a thousand unanswerable insults on Harry, hasn't put pebble on top of pebble until he's built a mighty avalanche. Peter isn't living in Harry's home, in the midst of Harry's friends, poised to betray everything Harry holds dear, not anymore. Peter doesn't enjoy the confidence of Harry's mentor and protector. I think that Harry's rage at discovering that Snape was the spy was as much at Dumbledore as at Snape--Harry trusted Dumbledore, and Dumbledore didn't tell him the whole truth, didn't mention that the snitch who fingered his parents was right there, within reach. Didn't mention that he, Dumbledore, was protecting the sneak who toppled that first domino that lead to Harry's parent's deaths. And there's more--have you ever failed to stop a loved one from pursuing self-destruction? Imagine Harry's frustration: He *knows* deep-down, that trusting Snape will be disastrous, but he can't convince Dumbledore, he *knows* he won't be able to convince Dumbledore even as he goes to the Headmaster's office. And after the events on the tower, after Harry is, in his own mind at least, proven right, he can't even go to Dumbledore and say, "I told you so." So Snape inherits Dumbledore's giant-sized portion of Harry's rage. I'm agnostic about Snape. I don't know if he's just the backstabbing scumbucket that he appears to be, if he's really Dumbledore's man, or if, as I suspect, he just wants Voldemort dead as badly as Harry does, and will do anything he has to towards that end. I'm pretty sure, though, that before that end can happen, he and Harry will have to come to some accommodation, and that that will be a very bitter potion for both of them. Amiable Dorsai From foxmoth at qnet.com Tue Jan 24 01:24:43 2006 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2006 01:24:43 -0000 Subject: ESE!Lupin condensed In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146932 > Ginger begins: > Greetings, Pippin (and all who have interest), > > As you may know, I have followed ESE!Lupin with great interest, and I > believe I have read most of what has been written on the subject. If > I am misunderstanding or retreading, please accapt my apologies. > > I may be confused by unclear pronouns here, but you said: > (Pippin) > > Lupin was instrumental in the prank, as Snape suspected. After he > > left Hogwarts, Lupin joined the Order. Needing an alias to hide > > behind while working undercover with the werewolves, he used the > > name Wormtail. > > Later you said: > (Pippin) > > Lupin then settled for arranging Peter's escape, knowing he would transform as they were enroute [to] the castle, calling the dementors away from the gates and once again endangering Harry. He then forced Peter to return to Voldemort and cooperate in the rebirthing scheme. It was he, AKA "Wormtail" who killed Cedric. > > Now for my confusion: > (Ginger) > > Do you mean to propose that Lupin was in the Graveyard, acting under > the name of Wormtail? IOW, it was not Peter who was there at all, > but rather a cloaked and hooded Lupin? Pippin: Not quite. Pettigrew was at the graveyard, and did all the things which Harry saw him do. But Harry did not see the killing of Cedric. He was lying on the ground with his hands over his face. He heard "a swishing noise and a second voice, which screeched the words to the night: '*Avada Kedavra!*'" I don't think it was Peter who did the killing. The killing curse is not easy to use, from what Bella and Fake!Moody tell us. Draco, knowing his life depends on it, having tried twice to commit murder already, hesitates and eventually fails. I don't think Peter is a killer. I think someone else was in the graveyard that night to make sure Peter followed instructions and to deal with contingencies such as the wrong triwizard champion's arrival. I don't think Voldemort would want to confront a powerful young wizard in his weakened state with only Wormtail to support him. JKR did say that Wormtail did the killing in the World Book Day chat. Rorujin: Did Wormtail used Voldemort's wand to kill Cedric? Is it why Cedric comes out of Voldemort's wand even though was Wormtail who killed him? JK Rowling replies -> Correct! Since the name Wormtail is false, the question of how Snape recognized the Marauder nicknames when he saw them on the map in PoA is still open, there are multiple characters with common names, and JKR has told us that she can't be full and frank with us until Book Seven is out, I don't think we can assume this chat answer is as definitive as some would like it to be. The battered worn case that identifies Lupin on the Hogwarts Express may be another dual identity clue. It's possible that there was another "Professor RJ Lupin" and Lupin's case originally belonged to him. We have a lot of people in canon who are blindly trying to be like their fathers, whether it is appropriate for them or not. Lupin might be another, dreaming of being a teacher like his father was and finding it hard to accept that his condition makes it a risk most wizards aren't willing to face. Pippin From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Tue Jan 24 01:44:36 2006 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2006 01:44:36 -0000 Subject: Professor R. J. Lupin (Was: ESE!Lupin condensed) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146933 houyhnhnm wrote: > When Lupin was on the train with the Trio at the beginning of PoA, Hermione knew who he was because she saw *Professor* R. J. Lupin "in peeling gold letters" on his suitcase. Where and when was Lupin a professor? Not Hogwarts as far as we know. Durmstrang? Carol responds: Christina made some interesting suggestions upthread, one of them being that the trunk belonged to Lupin's father or (paternal) grandfather, another being that he was a tutor (for home-schooled WW children?) rather than a teacher. Since Hogwarts is the only wizarding school in Britain and there are no wizarding universities, I think the tutoring is at least possible ("Professor" would be merely a courtesy title), more likely than a snobbish school like Beauxbatons or Durmstrang hiring someone so shabby and ill looking. Also, how likely is it that Durmstrang, which teaches the Dark Arts, would have a DADA teacher? And I think Lupin's secret would be rather difficult to conceal without Potions Master Snape to make wolfsbane potion for him. (BTW, surely Lupin would have missed more than one teaching day [and a Christmas dinner] in his year at Hogwarts. Maybe Snape substituted fairly frequently, but JKR chose to depict only the first of those classes.) At any rate, one night of anguished howling and lunging against the locked doors of his living quarters at Beauxbatons or Durmstrang, or worse, breaking free and loping through the corridors, terrifying the staff and students, and he'd be out of a job and quite possibly dead. I don't think he could have taught in Muggle schools considering that his specialty is DADA, specifically minor Dark creatures. (Imagine Dudley Dursley coming home to Petunia and informing his mother that he'd been learning about grindylows and was looking forward to learning about werewolves later in the school year.) More likely, he could have taught at one of the smaller European wizarding schools, or even in the U.S. or Canada (though the British WW does seem to forget that the Western Hemisphere exists). And here's another possibility (I'm expecting to be Howled at for my stupidity, but here goes): We know that at least one person, Professor Quirrell, taught DADA at Hogwarts twice, with a year-long gap in between the two classes. We know how the DADA curse affected him the second time; I've speculated that the first time around, it took the form of an irresistible desire to go to Albania, ostensibly to see the vampires but really to try to find the vaporized Voldemort. Regardless of how he did it, however, he did manage to teach DADA twice before the curse finished him off. So it's possible that Remus Lupin also taught at Hogwarts earlier (before Harry was a student there), either using the Shrieking Shack to transform in or having access to Snape's wolfsbane potion as in PoA. The DADA curse would have found a way to cause him to lose his job the first time around without Snape revealing Lupin's secret. If Remus held the position very early in his adult life, either right after he graduated (while Severus was still a DE) or during Snape's first year or so as a teacher, the letters on the trunk would be around fourteen years old and quite likely to be peeling. (Then again, Sirius Black didn't know that Snape was teaching at Hogwarts and surely Lupin would have told him if they were there at the same time, so it would have had to be while Snape was still a DE or a spy for Dumbledore, IOW before September 1, 1981, when Snape took the Potions position.) What I don't understand is why he couldn't use Reparo or some similar charm to fix those peeling letters. For that matter, he should be able to repair his robes with some sort of mending spell. Surely he would take them off when he knows it's time to transform? As for the question asked in another thread about why Lupin looks so ill and gray-haired now compared with PoA, I think the answer is quite simple. He doesn't have Severus Snape around to prepare the wolfsbane potion, and he never learned how to make it himself, so he suffers horribly during his transformations, as he didn't during PoA. Carol, noting for Catlady that Snape began teaching at the beginning of the term and could not have been at Godric's Hollow on October 31, nor could he have learned about the change in Secret Keepers, which occurred the week before Godric's Hollow From rkdas at charter.net Tue Jan 24 02:04:02 2006 From: rkdas at charter.net (susanbones2003) Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2006 02:04:02 -0000 Subject: Slughorn -- DE or not? (was Re: When will the ministry start kicking butt and taking names?) In-Reply-To: <20060123124425.57150.qmail@web53203.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146934 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Maria Vaerewijck wrote: > > Jen D wrote: > > John Granger's excellent paper on HPB has an eye-opening analysis > of Slughorn and one of his most intriguing points was that the fake > attack that Slughorn set up before DD and Harry go to his house was > perhaps a little too good. I seem to remember that the Dark > Mark hung above the house. If I remember my GOF canon correctly, it > was only LV's followers who knew how to conjure that mark. I do not > trust Slughorn as far as I can spit him. < > > > maria8162001: > There was no dark mark hanging above the house where Slughorn > was staying. That's what gave him away from the pretended DE > attack, the lack of the dark mark. As every wizard knows whenever > the DEs attack a certain place the Dark mark always hung above, > and with Slughorn's case there was none of it. Hi there again, I just wanted to make my point with book in hand. Regarding the fake attack on Slughorn's house: "My dear Horace," said Dumbledore, looking amused, "if the Death Eaters had really come to call, the Dark Mark would have been set over the house." The wizard clapped a pudgy hand to his vast forehead. " The Dark Mark," he muttered. "Knew thre was something ...ah well. Wouldn't have had time anyway. I'd only just put the finishing touches to my upholstery when you entered the room." p. 64, Scholastic Books ed. Now that's not as good as casting the mark but it is sufficiently ambiguous to make me question his loyalties. Jen D, putting her head back into her book and memorizing all the important stuff... > From rh64643 at appstate.edu Tue Jan 24 02:08:07 2006 From: rh64643 at appstate.edu (truthbeauty1) Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2006 02:08:07 -0000 Subject: Assuming they survive... In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146935 Harry- something quiet. He is great at Quidditch, but I can't really see him wanting to be in the lime light. Maybe he will open a Quidditch shop, or be a Quidditch reporter. haha Hermione- I would honestly love to see her as the 1st Muggle Born M.O.M. She would be so innovative and would have the guts to make the reforms that are needed. Ron- married to the M.O.M and a Professional Quidditch player. He deserves a little limelight, and we have learned that he actually is a really great player. I would love to see him play for the Cannons. Neville- is going to teach Herbology. I can just feel it. Ginny- She could do anything I guess. She wouldn't have to work though. I mean, provided she is married to Harry. He is going to be loaded. haha Luna- is going to discover all of those animals and prove she is completely right. Oh and be married to Fred or George or Krum. haha From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Tue Jan 24 02:55:10 2006 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2006 02:55:10 -0000 Subject: Why Tom left Merope /Draco and Harry In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146936 > > >>Alla: > > I think to learn that your wife is a witch and son is a wizard > > could be pretty explosive revelation. Again, it does not mean that > > Tobias should have reacted that way, of course, but such > > revelation caused Tom Riddle Sr. to leave his wife, you know. > > > > Betsy Hp: > Actually, I think Tom Riddle left his "wife" because he finally > realized that she'd used either a mind-altering potion or a mind- > Altering spell to kidnap and repeatedly rape him. Alla: Correct, but this is a smaller revelation, the larger revelation is that Merope is a witch and I don't remember that Tom Riddle knew that. Basically, what I was trying to say is that BECAUSE Tom learned that Merope used a love potion on him, he learned that she is a witch. Unless I am suffering a temporary memory loss and there is something in canon that says that Tom knew who Merope was before he fall under her spell. >> Betsy Hp: > Draco makes the mistake of thinking Harry has been raised a wizard. > Harry makes the mistake of thinking Draco is just like Dudley. (JKR > makes it clear that Draco is nothing like Dudley, beating us over > the head with the differences in CoS in case we missed all the clues > in PS/SS.) Alla: Personally I see a lot of similarities between Draco and Dudley. Dudley is engaged in 'Harry hunting", Draco seems to be very happy to engage in "Hermione hunting" in CoS and then adds Ron to the mix. Dudley is Muggle type of bully, Draco is a Wizard type of bully, not only bully, but the one who seems to be willing to go further than words into actions. IMO of course. So, no I don't see much difference between them at all. And of course Draco's "I'll bully father into getting me one" reminds Harry of Dudley wanting more and more presents. Mistake? Personally I don't think so. JMO of course. Betsy Hp: Draco makes the mistake of thinking making fun of Hagrid > would amuse Harry (too bad it wasn't Filch peering in the window). Alla: How do you know that? How do you know that Draco insults Hagrid because he wants to amuse Harry? The way I see it Draco already has his opinion of Hagrid before he knew who Hagrid was. When Draco sees Hagrid at first, he is just surprised, but when Draco hears who THAT man is, oh then he spits the words of contempt right away. "I say, look at that man!" said the boy suddenly, nodding toward the front window. Hagrid was standing there, grinning at Harry and pointing at two large ice creams to show he couldn't come in. 'That's Hagrid," said Harry pleased to know something the boy didn't."He works at Hogwarts" - PS/SS, p.78. And after that Draco starts speaking. And I would say that is Draco's ugly prejudices speaking which have nothing to do with amusing Harry. IMO of course. "Oh," said the boy, "I've heard of him. He's sort of servant, isn't he?" "He's the gamekeeper," said Harry. He was liking the boy less and less. "Yes, exactly. I heard he's sort of savage - lives in a hut on the school grounds and every now and then he gets drunk, tries to do magic, and ends up setting fire to his bed" - PS/SS, p.78. So, dear Draco judged the person whom he NEVER saw before as low life, basically. And you are saying that was for Harry's amusement? I don't see it at all. > > >>Gerry: > > Draco asking about Harry's parents being the right kind > > immediately follows that they should not let the other kind go to > > Hogwarts. The other kind being witches and wizards with Muggle > > parents, e.g. Harry's mum! > > Betsy Hp: > But Draco doesn't insult Lily on purpose. That's where the > misspeaking comes in, I think. If Draco had realized that this was > Harry Potter he was speaking to he probably would have asked Harry > about the horrors of being raised by Muggles, and Harry would have > been glad to fill him in. Alla: That's the point, IMO. Because he did not know who Harry Potter was, Draco shows him his ugly inner self by insulting ALL muggleborn witches and wizards. I don't care that if Draco knew who Harry was he may have not insulted Lily. (How do you know that by the way?) It would not have changed his opinion of Muggleborns witches and wizards; he would just have hidden it from Harry, IMO. As it is, Harry saw the OBJECTIVE picture of Draco's major personality trait - his prejudice and hatred of Muggleborns and figured out that Ron's genuine interest is much better than Draco's attitudes. All I can say that IMO Harry judged pretty well. To me it is as I wrote before - Harry so far had very GOOD reason IMO not to look beyond Draco's surface ( and there is maybe something of course), BUT to MAKE Harry look beyond, Draco needs to stop hating. When he does, IF he does, then I am sure Harry will look beyond and will see misguided, confused teenager, who finally figured out which side he should be on. > Betsy Hp: > And Draco was merely curious about the boy in the shop. Alla: Till he found out that that boy's parents were of the "wrong kind". > > >>Geoff: > > Being more serious, I would be very suspicious of having the twins > > as my friends and protectors. > > Alla: Snort, Geoff. I agree with 95% of what you write, but finally I found the topic on which I disagree with you. I would LOVE to have twins as friends and protectors. > Betsy Hp: > And I know this makes people laugh (out loud, even ) but I do > think it strange that the twins shop can get away with tweaking > Voldemort while other shop keepers get disappeared. Alla: Well, yes, it really does. Sorry! JMO, Alla From witherwing at sbcglobal.net Tue Jan 24 02:56:33 2006 From: witherwing at sbcglobal.net (Rebecca Scalf) Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2006 02:56:33 -0000 Subject: DD asked Snape to Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146937 >Corey: Hi list members, how's it going? Are any list members of the view that Dumbledore might have asked Snape to kill Dumbledore because he was dying anyway? I think Snape killed Dumbledore because he's with Voldemort. Just wondering what people think. Witherwing: I'm a DDM! Snape hopeful, so after reading HBP I was trying to find a reason why DD would ask Snape to kill him. The thing my mind keeps coming around to again and again is DD's withered hand, the one he kept promising to tell Harry the story about. If it was a mortal wound, maybe DD, powerful wizard, could keep himself alive long enough to give Harry a few parting lessons (perhaps with the help of Snape?). From bawilson at citynet.net Mon Jan 23 21:52:55 2006 From: bawilson at citynet.net (bawilson at citynet.net) Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2006 16:52:55 -0500 (EST) Subject: Snape's childhood memory Message-ID: <17421134.1138053175567.JavaMail.administrator@webmail> No: HPFGUIDX 146938 "Alla Eileen was a witch, so isn't it possible that that scene which we all saw in Snape's memories was ONE incident when Tobias learned that his wife is a witch and his son is a wizard? It does NOT IMO necessarily show that Snape had an abusive past. He may have witnessed ONE altercation between his parents during his childhood and remembered it well, because it was UNIQUE." BAW: Also, Severus was very small when it happened. To a child, Tobias' anger would have looked more apocalyptic than it really was. BAW From AllieS426 at aol.com Tue Jan 24 04:17:28 2006 From: AllieS426 at aol.com (allies426) Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2006 04:17:28 -0000 Subject: "Professor" Lupin, was: Re: ESE!Lupin condensed In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146939 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "spotsgal" wrote: > I find the letters on the case so interesting, > because there's no reason it has to be there. The kids could have > just been helped by a nameless man on the traincar, only to find out > *later* that he was the new professor. Or they could have asked Lupin > who he was after the Dementors boarded the train. Or they just could > have figured it out - how many adults travel on the Hogwarts Express? > > > Christina > Allie: I like the idea that the Marauders bought it for him as a joke. You're totally right about the letters not needing to be there- the case could even have said just "RJ Lupin" with no "professor." Hermione still would have figured him for the new teacher. From katmac at katmac.cncdsl.com Tue Jan 24 04:16:22 2006 From: katmac at katmac.cncdsl.com (lagattalucianese) Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2006 04:16:22 -0000 Subject: Snape again In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146940 > > zgirnius: > ... > > One thing that I find very odd about the 'Prank' is Young Snape's > actions afterwards. He never reveals Lupin's secret (until PoA, a > good 15 to 20 years later), which I find very mysterious. I would > have expected him to want his revenge on the Marauders for this > incident, and what better way than to reveal Lupin's secret to the > school, and the wider world? It would have been completely awful for > Lupin, of course, but also, I think, for Sirius, since he would of > course bear some responsibility for facilitating Snape in his > learning of the secret. And he could have done it under an oh-so- > righteous cover of concern for the safety of his fellow students, > yada yada yada. > ... > La Gatta Lucianese: Or here's one that's not too far too seek: We know that Lupin was not happy about the Pensieve incident, and neither was Lily, obviously. What about Lupin being the one (since he was a prefect that year), either on his own or with Lily's persuasion and in her company, going to Dumbledore about what the Marauders were doing to Snape. Dumbledore would, probably, have called Snape in and verified what was going on, either in the presence of Lupin or Lupin and Lily or with the assurance that he had heard about it from him/them. This scenario would not only explain Snape's decreased hostility toward Lupin, it would also give some motivation to the Prank: Sirius would be not only destroying Snape but punishing Lupin for putting an end to his jolly fun with Snivellus. James' interference would further anger him, and the whole incident could explain the cooler feelings amongst the Marauders, and particularly toward Lupin. From AllieS426 at aol.com Tue Jan 24 04:24:21 2006 From: AllieS426 at aol.com (allies426) Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2006 04:24:21 -0000 Subject: Assuming they survive... In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146941 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Steve" wrote: > > > Harry Potter's Wizards Brew - All-Natural Suprisingly Strong Ginger > Brew (ginger beer or ale depending on where you live - no alchohol). > > Harry Potter's Ginger Cream Ice Cream - better than you might expect. > Made by Fortescue. Plus monthly variations; raspberry swirl ginger > cream, strawberry swirl ginger cream, etc.... > > > Oh yeah... Ron and Harry buy the Chudley Cannons and as a direct > result of doing that, they take over the food and drink concessions at > all the national Quidditch Stadiums. Food which now includes Chocolate > dipped ginger cream on a stick. > Allie: You are a far cry from those who think the Weasley twins ESE! They're going to make everyone rich! (That's fine with me.) Just curious - did I miss a ginger obsession somewhere in Potterverse or is this a British thing, because I don't get all the ginger references... From ceridwennight at hotmail.com Tue Jan 24 05:25:21 2006 From: ceridwennight at hotmail.com (Ceridwen) Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2006 05:25:21 -0000 Subject: Do any list members think Dumbledore might have asked Snape to kill him? In-Reply-To: <000001c62047$f28754c0$7f56a4ac@Overton> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146942 Corey: > Hi list members, how's it going? Are any list members of the view > that Dumbledore might have asked Snape to kill Dumbledore because > he was dying anyway? I think Snape killed Dumbledore because he's > with Voldemort. Just wondering what people think. Ceridwen: It's pretty hard to decide. That was my first impression, because Dumbledore has said, in effect, that he is not afraid of death. So, why would he beg for his life? There have been some possible answers to that specific question - that he doesn't want Snape to tear his soul, that he still has things to teach Harry, being two of them that I recall offhand. Then, there are the clues (or possibly red herrings) mentioned in the cave, immediately afterwards, and on the tower which show Dumbledore being in a very bad physical state. Harry has to say Rennervate twice to get him to wake up in the cave, Harry has to help him out of the cave and use side-along Apparition to get him back to Hogsmeade; in Hogsmeade, he is portrayed as weak and fading fast and only Rosemerta's news that the Dark Mark is over Hogwarts can rally him. On the tower, he is sliding down the wall as he talks to Draco, and he is unnaturally pale. His quickness seems to be failing him too, because Draco was able to disarm him. When Snape shows up, his voice, which has been strong or at least not noticeably weak from Harry's viewpoint, suddenly becomes very weak to the point of sending shivers down Harry's spine. Other clues: Dumbledore mentioning more than once at the cave that he is expendable while Harry is not; Hermione's mention of certain potions/poisons having no antidote; possibly the argument Hagrid overheard between Snape and Dumbledore in the forest (though that is only partially heard, and reported second-hand). Would JKR introduce euthanasia into a series that is supposed to be for growing children? She has already introduced senseless death, children losing their parents, people being tortured into insanity, and other things that, recently, people have thought to be too nasty for kids to deal with. However, euthanasia is a current political hot-potato, widely debated with no concensus in a child's real world. Would she seek to influence children to perhaps go against their parents by bringing it up and offering this solution to them? I do think there was more to the AK on the tower than what Harry saw and absorbed. Don't forget, the situation was already emotionally charged, with Harry's fear for Dumbledore being threatened, and his temporary relief of seeing Draco's wand falter. If Harry, our 'reporter on the scene', misses something, it is understandable. Soon after, he misrepresents something Dumbledore told him, quite possibly because of the emotional stress he was under, alternately, because of his hatred for Snape, which has just been taken to a new level. So, I think it's up in the air. And I am on pins and needles waiting for book 7 to get it sorted out. Ceridwen. From beatrice23 at yahoo.com Tue Jan 24 04:41:43 2006 From: beatrice23 at yahoo.com (Beatrice23) Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2006 04:41:43 -0000 Subject: Do any list members think Dumbledore might have asked Snape to kill him? In-Reply-To: <000001c62047$f28754c0$7f56a4ac@Overton> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146943 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Corey Overton" wrote: > > Hi list members, how's it going? Are any list members of the view > that Dumbledore might have asked Snape to kill Dumbledore because > he was dying anyway? I think Snape killed Dumbledore because he's > with Voldemort. Just wondering what people think. > > Your fellow member, > Corey > I think that Dumbledore might have had Snape kill him (dumbledore). 1. We have been mislead into thinking that Snape is ESE over and over again. 2. In previous books, Dumbledore has indicated that he is not afraid of death, so why beg Snape on the tower? We never hear him beg for his life, so might he be begging for Snape to fulfill his promise? 3. How can Snape avoid killing DD? He has been spying on DE's, he made an unbreakable vow, the confrontation takes place in front of DE...etc. If he does not act he dies and they lose a spy close to Voldemort. If he acts he loses his place as spy against the order. It is a catch-22 that is typical of rowling. 4. Some think that DD is not dead. Don't know if I belive this one, but could Snape use one of the Weasley's fake wands and still fulfill his promise as he would still have uttered the spell with the intent to kill? Anyway that is all I can think of this late. Beatrice From maria8162001 at yahoo.com Mon Jan 23 13:18:51 2006 From: maria8162001 at yahoo.com (Maria Vaerewijck) Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2006 05:18:51 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Burrow Wedding In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20060123131851.30053.qmail@web53207.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 146944 geebsy wrote: Not having the time to data-mine the many web-sites and posts I am just wondering if anyone knows why the Fleur/Bill wedding is taking place at the Burrow? Surely Fleur would prefer to have it in her home town; in her own home? Lets face it, the Weasley homestead is not much to look at, and although it is perfect for Harry, does not seem to be the ideal place for the wedding--especially with You-know- Who and The Death-Eaters running around. maria8162001: I guess, Fleur doesn't care wherever it is done. If you love the person so much it doesn't matter how it is done and where it is done, and I believe she love Bill so much that the place of the wedding doesn't matter to her, especially now with what happen to Bill. She just want Bill to be happy and be with Bill forever. In our real world that would take a lot of guts for anyone to marry a disfigured person even when they claim they love the person. That is a very admirable quality of Fleur, she's not superficial. Where it's done and how it's done is not her concern. maria8162001 Before posting to any list, you MUST read the group's Admin File! http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/files/Admin_Files/HBF_Text__MUST_READ Please use accurate subject headings and snip unnecessary material from posts to which you're replying! SPONSORED LINKS Half-blood prince Adult education Culture club Organizational culture --------------------------------- YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS Visit your group "HPforGrownups" on the web. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: HPforGrownups-unsubscribe at yahoogroups.com Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. --------------------------------- --------------------------------- Yahoo! Autos. Looking for a sweet ride? Get pricing, reviews, & more on new and used cars. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From DEDEE4 at HOTMAIL.COM Mon Jan 23 22:12:25 2006 From: DEDEE4 at HOTMAIL.COM (dez4lee) Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2006 22:12:25 -0000 Subject: Assuming they survive... In-Reply-To: <20060123215514.81250.qmail@web53107.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146945 > Luckdragon: > Any thoughts on what the Hogwarts students will choose for careers after Hogwarts. > Hey...I was thinking that Hermione would become Headmistress of Hogwarts...I'm not sure about Harry, i'm torn between an Auror or a Professional Quidditch player. I have no theories on Ron... Neville will definately be a Herbologist.. dez4lee From imamommy at sbcglobal.net Tue Jan 24 07:02:24 2006 From: imamommy at sbcglobal.net (Emily) Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2006 07:02:24 -0000 Subject: Pity for Wormtail (was Re: Snape again) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146946 (message contains LOTR spoilers) wrote: snip He later > finds out that Peter Pettigrew is the "murderin' traitor," and he > regards PP with revulsion, but the violent hatred and the desire to > kill the traitor who betrayed his friends is gone. Even after Wormtail > murders Cedric on LV's orders, Harry hardly gives Wormtail a thought. > As far as he's concerned, Voldemort murdered Cedric. The fact that > Wormtail cast the Unforgiveable Curse that killed an innocent boy > never quite seems to sink into Harry's brain. Harry has no personal > vendetta against him, even though it was Wormtail who tied him to the > gravestone, Wormtail who cut Harry's arm with a dagger to get his > blood for the potion, Wormtail who resurrected Voldemort. And yet > Wormtail, like Black, was his father's trusted friend. snip Is Wormtail just > "vermin," unworthy of hatred, even though his crime is more directly > linked to the Potters' deaths than Snape's is, whether or not Snape's > remorse is genuine? Why don't his crimes, which are legion, affect > Harry in the way that Snape's transgressions, some of them as small as > taunting Sirius Black in OoP, do? Snip > > Carol, who really needs to resist the compulsion to include every > detail and just get to the meat of the matter Emily, I'm reminded forcefully of Frodo's reaction to Gollum in LOTR when he does finally see him: "I do pity him." I think, even though PP did all these terrible things, Harry pities him for the control LV has over his life. He is repulsed by him, sure, but he recognizes that Peter lacks any strength of character at all, and I think (not at all canon here) he subconsciously counts Peter as another Voldemort casualty. However, I don't think he cares for Peter (in the way Frodo sort of cared for Gollum), b/c he doesn't feel badly about giving him over to the dementors. Also, I think Harry knows Peter is a puppet for LV, but Snape is different. Harry knows Snape has strength to choose. This is what makes Snape so powerful, and so dangerous. He does not seem to fear Voldemort, even less so than, say, Lucius, and he does not seem to worship him a la Bellatrix. He only seems to have loyalty to himself and his own aims, whether those be to torment Harry or to follow Voldie. This is, IMO, why *we* have so much trouble figuring Snape out: whomever he is serving, be it LV, DD, or himself, it seems definite he is doing it consciously and for his own purposes. Emily From imamommy at sbcglobal.net Tue Jan 24 07:21:28 2006 From: imamommy at sbcglobal.net (Emily) Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2006 07:21:28 -0000 Subject: Professor R. J. Lupin (Was: ESE!Lupin condensed) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146947 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "justcarol67" wrote: "We know that at least one person, Professor Quirrell, taught DADA at Hogwarts twice, with a year-long gap in between the two classes." Do we? IIRC, doesn't Hagrid say something like, "He was fine while he was studying out of books, but then he took a year off..." Is it possible that he wasn't teaching while he was studying? Possibly training to be an Auror or something instead? Then when he came back a mess, he was recruited for the teaching position? After all, they say those who can't do, teach... Emily (Who means no offense to any teachers) From gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk Tue Jan 24 07:42:35 2006 From: gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk (Geoff Bannister) Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2006 07:42:35 -0000 Subject: Assuming they survive... In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146948 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "allies426" wrote: > Allie: > > You are a far cry from those who think the Weasley twins ESE! > They're going to make everyone rich! (That's fine with me.) Just > curious - did I miss a ginger obsession somewhere in Potterverse or > is this a British thing, because I don't get all the ginger > references... Geoff: Could be JKR herself having a passion for ginger..... I am renowned among my family and friends for my capacity to scoff chocolate and liquorice (not at the same time though!). From DEDEE4 at HOTMAIL.COM Mon Jan 23 22:15:14 2006 From: DEDEE4 at HOTMAIL.COM (dez4lee) Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2006 22:15:14 -0000 Subject: JKR interview Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146949 Check out this JKR Interview: http://www.quick-quote-quill.org/articles/2006/0110-tatler-grieg.html dez4lee From finwitch at yahoo.com Tue Jan 24 08:16:45 2006 From: finwitch at yahoo.com (finwitch) Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2006 08:16:45 -0000 Subject: fading importance of adult characters In-Reply-To: <000a01c62037$cbe28cf0$0400a8c0@pensive> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146950 > > Sherry now: i want more about Sirius and the Potters. I want Lupin > to step into the mentor role, or if it's really too late for a mentor, then > into the role of adult friend, the bridge between Harry and his parents in a > way. The marauders back story is of more interest to me than any other side > story or sub plot, and I'd love to know more about their incredible > friendship. But I think I'm out of luck, and it will be Harry, his friends > and even his enemies in his own age group, who will be the stars in the last > book. Finwitch: Yes - I'd like to hear the background stories too. We *still* need to hear the full story about Sirius16 telling Snape how to pass the Whomping Willow! The Sirius' version, that is. And, just *what* was the thing that got Sirius so very against "Snivellus?" I presume he'd been reliving that for 12 years, but... what *was* it? And, I also wish to hear something about Dumbledore's childhood (Aberforth telling Harry? But that guy doesn't seem to be talking much at all). And yes, the ever mysterious Severus Snape. Can you believe it? He kills Albus Dumbledore, and *yet* we cannot be certain if he's good or evil?!? Harry will be officially adult in the next book (Ron & Hermione are already) so er - should we consider them as 'adult characters' from now on? Finwitch From finwitch at yahoo.com Tue Jan 24 08:22:28 2006 From: finwitch at yahoo.com (finwitch) Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2006 08:22:28 -0000 Subject: Assuming they survive... In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146951 > > Sherrie: > > Hermione - either a professor > > Kelleyaynn: > > How about an Unspeakable? She certainly has the magical talent. Finwitch: I certainly support Hermione to become Unspeakable. She's so curious, you know - and 'no one knows what Unspeakables do' - well, that's just the sort she'd want to know! And I think Neville would be excellent as a professor. Finwitch From bboyminn at yahoo.com Tue Jan 24 08:30:00 2006 From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2006 08:30:00 -0000 Subject: Assuming they survive... In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146952 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "allies426" wrote: > > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Steve" wrote: > > > > > > Harry Potter's Wizards Brew - All-Natural Suprisingly Strong > > Ginger Brew ... > > > > Harry Potter's Ginger Cream Ice Cream -... > > > > Oh yeah... ..., ... Food which now includes > > Chocolate dipped ginger cream on a stick. > > > > Allie: > > You are a far cry from those who think the Weasley twins ESE! > They're going to make everyone rich! (That's fine with me.) Just > curious - did I miss a ginger obsession somewhere in Potterverse or > is this a British thing, because I don't get all the ginger > references... > bboyminn: Well, I'm now straying even more dangerously far off Group Topic. All the Ginger references stem from my own fanfiction. NOTE: this particular story is suitable for ADULTS ONLY, especially those with 'slashy' tendencies. The story begins with Harry being gravely ill, and the only thing he can take in in great quantities is warm flat ginger ale, which by the way does work well if you are sick. That leads to Ron having ginger ale bottled by a British Ginger Ale company using 'Harry Potter - Wizards Brew' labels. Ron then gave this to Harry as a birthday present. Just a private label brand made especially for them on an as needed basis. Remember, these guys are rich, so little extravagance like this are no problem. This leads to Harry and Ron trying to think of other things they can do with the ginger syrup that the ginger ale is made from, which in turn leads to Ginger Ice Cream. Then it cascades from there with them coming up with more and more ginger products. To at least make an attempt to get this back on track, let me say that I am just trying to illustrate that even though Harry doesn't appear to have any business potential at the moment, that doesn't mean that in the future he couldn't be of great value to Weasley Enterprises. I really have a strong sense that Weasley Enterprises (as I call it) is Harry's ace in the whole. When he is done Dark Wizard fighting and struggling to find a way to make a living, the Twins will reveal that they have made him a partner in the business. From that Harry will have wealth and purpose to carry him through his long life. I really have nothing to base this on other than intuition, and the fact that Harry's gift/loan to the Twins hasn't been resolved in the story yet. Like I said, I think JKR is holding this out as Harry's ace in the hole; that loan to the Twins secures Harry's future. Just a few, hopefully sufficiently on-topic, thoughts. Steve/bboyminn From finwitch at yahoo.com Tue Jan 24 08:31:08 2006 From: finwitch at yahoo.com (finwitch) Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2006 08:31:08 -0000 Subject: Professor R. J. Lupin (Was: ESE!Lupin condensed) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146953 > houyhnhnm wrote: > > > When Lupin was on the train with the Trio at the beginning of PoA, > Hermione knew who he was because she saw *Professor* R. J. Lupin "in > peeling gold letters" on his suitcase. Where and when was Lupin a > professor? Not Hogwarts as far as we know. Durmstrang? Finwitch: Obviously, at Hogwarts during Harry's third year! As for the briefcase with peeling gold letters - remember that Ollivander had such as well? And someone (I forget who) advertised such letters in QWC. He may well have bought that upon being hired, complete with the letters. OR - it was a gift from James&Sirius, 'professor' being a joke due to his reading-habits/being a prefect. Or *Dumbledore* gave it to him as a start-a-job-bonus or something like that... Finwitch From duckyslilangel_2 at yahoo.com Tue Jan 24 00:24:37 2006 From: duckyslilangel_2 at yahoo.com (Amber) Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2006 16:24:37 -0800 (PST) Subject: The Twins (was Re: Draco and Harry (was:The GoF Train Scene - and beyond...)) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20060124002437.81555.qmail@web52111.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 146954 Geoff: >> We see them in OOTP cheerfully encouraging the First Years to try out their joke products - which they haven't fully tested themselves - for cash despite the fact that some of the youngsters are ill as a result. They leave the Ton-Tongue Toffee near Dudley knowing that he will almost certainly eat one because he is greedy, leaving Arthur to pick up the pieces and restore calm.<< *Snip* Amber: I could be wrong on this, but when the twins have the first years test their joke sweets, they got ill because that is what they are meant to do. The only time they actually gave them out without testing them properly is when they gave the wrong end of a nosebleed nougat to someone during Quidditch Practice. As for leaving behind the Ton Tongue Toffees, this was just showing how big of pracitcal jokers they were. Geoff: >> As young children themselves,they traumatised Ron by transforming his tedyd into a spider and creating the deep-rooted arachnophobia which surfaces in the books from time to time. In HBP, we learn that they almost created an Unbreakable Vow involving Ron for heaven knows what pupose if Arthur hadn't interrupted them. They are also guilty of having persistently humiliated and embarrassed Ron - and before him, Percy - with little consideration for their feelings and have also been responsible for being rude to Molly in public. << *Snip* Amber: I have two younger brothers myself, and can remember fondly torturing them to no end. I believe by putting this in the books it also shows that their tendancy of being practical jokers goes back a long way. As for them being rude to Molly in public, they are teenagers. Granted, it is never right, but that seems to be a right of passage for teenagers, at least the ones that I knew. The tended to get a little mouthy with their parents to see how far they could go. I don't really remember Molly ever getting really angry, just exasperated. Once again...this all IMO, feel free to disagree or heck..even agree! From rdoliver30 at yahoo.com Tue Jan 24 05:21:55 2006 From: rdoliver30 at yahoo.com (lupinlore) Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2006 05:21:55 -0000 Subject: Snape again In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146955 Carol wrote: > Anyway, it seems strange to me that both Black and Snape somehow > push Harry's buttons, creating a huge emotional reaction in him > that Wormtail, friend of his father or no, doesn't create. Is > Wormtail just "vermin," unworthy of hatred, even though his crime > is more directly linked to the Potters' deaths than Snape's is, > whether or not Snape's remorse is genuine? Yes, I think that pretty well covers it, up to this point in any case. It's hard to hate a subhuman, and that is the way Wormtail has been portrayed to us -- and been viewed by almost everyone in the books -- up through Book VI. Whether that is a correct impression or not is still to be seen. JKR seems to find Wormtail very important, so likely the impression will be shifted to an extent in Book VII. But I think up till now Wormtail has been viewed by Harry, and pretty much everybody else, as a bipedal incarnation of his animagus form. You may find rats disgusting, and you certainly exterminate them. But hating them is pretty much beside the point, as they don't have any ability to act in any way other than that dictated by their very nature. > Why don't his crimes, which are legion, affect Harry in the way > that Snape's transgressions, some of them as small as taunting > Sirius Black in OoP, do? Yes, I know that Snape is Harry's > teacher and that he's sometimes unfair and often sarcastic, but > *he* wasn't the Secret Keeper. So, what's the point? Snape is a child abuser. Harry's hatred for him is perfectly healthy and natural. And the miserable fate undoubtedly waiting for Snape is perfectly just and fitting. I really don't see a problem here. Lupinlore From iris_ft at yahoo.fr Tue Jan 24 11:40:37 2006 From: iris_ft at yahoo.fr (iris_ft) Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2006 11:40:37 -0000 Subject: The Secret Revealed! (Draco and Harry (was:The GoF Train Scene--and beyond...)) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146956 Amiable wrote: > >Forget ESE!Snape, or ESEviler!Lupin. >I give you ESEvilest!Molly. Tremble before her! >Amiable "Got a new job at the Quibbler" Dorsai Ceridwen replied: > You know, we could really make a case for Ultra-Deep-Cover ESEvilest! > Weasleys! > > *g* again, in case anyone thinks I'm serious about this! > > Ceridwen. Aaah... but this is exactly the kind of rumour that made the Prieur? of Sion become what it is, "Sub rosa" and everywhere else. Moreover, it is plausible, if you take enough time to build a (canon proof) demonstration. Some more Knuts for the new theory: maybe Bill Weasley will become a werewolf, and he has a snake fang as an ear ring. If these clues don't show he's on Voldemort's side Amicalement, and of course seriously Iris From willsonkmom at msn.com Tue Jan 24 12:08:45 2006 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2006 12:08:45 -0000 Subject: Assuming they survive... In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146957 > > Geoff: > Perhaps someone can confirm this but I have a feeling that JKR has > said that none of the puils will come back as teachers except perhaps > one but not Harry. > > I can't locate it in the various quotes sources > > Can someone use a "Point Me" spell please? Potioncat: I didn't see an answer linked to this post. I can't provide the quote either. As I recall, JKR was speaking with a group of children...if that will help narrow the interview down. She said something along the line that one of Harry's classmates would become a teacher, but not who we'd suspect. (Which I took to mean, not Hermione.) She also said, or perhaps indicated it wouldn't be Harry. I'm not sure if that only leaves Ron, or if it leaves any of the thousands of students who attended Hogwarts at the same time as Harry. My bet is Percy at Tranfigurations in book 7. From maria.elmvang at gmail.com Tue Jan 24 12:07:24 2006 From: maria.elmvang at gmail.com (Maria Elmvang) Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2006 13:07:24 +0100 Subject: Sirius' death (was: Re: ESE!Lupin condensed) Message-ID: <17785fc30601240407q17f95a3evdfff883023d0b3bc@mail.gmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 146958 susanbones2003 wrote: > > I was also left cold the the speed at which Sirius (and his meaning, > > affect on Harry, the whole arc) was disposed of. I wondered and > > still do if that is a harbinger of things to come. Usefulness over, > > character gone and forgotten. She does have quite a bit on her plate > > without getting in too deep. > > kchuplis: > I admire the speed and finality of death in these books. They are just > very realistic. It gives us, the reader, that same wrenching "left > undone" feel that a true close death gives. JKR does not skirt the > issue of how final, how scary, how sudden and how empty death is for > the living. Maria next: I respectfully disagree, Karen. Sirius' death did not touch me *at all*. I liked Sirius' character, but his entire death was just such a 'non-event' that - like Susan - it left me cold. I actually had to go back and reread the last few pages to even realize *that* he'd died... I remember the next chapter starting out with something like "Harry couldn't believe Sirius was dead" (or something similar - sorry, I don't have the book here), and I thought "Huh? He died?"... oh yeah... he 'fell through the veil'. I was touched by both Cedric and Dumbledore's death, so I think it was just a spot of bad writing on JKR's behalf (but then, OotP is so far my least favourite of the HP books that I'm inclined to say I dislike it). After having known for the entire book that somebody was going to die, it was just too anti-climatic. And since I'm writing - to touch upon the original topic. I, for one, definitely DON'T believe in ESE!Lupin. First of all, I have yet to see any convincing evidence. Secondly, book 7 has a finite length. JKR will be hard pressed to tie up all loose threads as it is, without introducing a new (long) plot-twist. Just my two cents. Maria -- I believe in God like I believe in the sun not because I see it, but by it I see everything else --- C.S. Lewis [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From foxmoth at qnet.com Tue Jan 24 13:42:27 2006 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2006 13:42:27 -0000 Subject: Assuming they survive... In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146959 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "potioncat" wrote: > > > > > > Geoff: > > Perhaps someone can confirm this but I have a feeling that JKR has > > said that none of the puils will come back as teachers except perhaps > > one but not Harry. > > > > I can't locate it in the various quotes sources > > > > Can someone use a "Point Me" spell please? > > > Potioncat: > I didn't see an answer linked to this post. I can't provide the quote > either. As I recall, JKR was speaking with a group of children...if > that will help narrow the interview down. She said something along the > line that one of Harry's classmates would become a teacher, but not who > we'd suspect. (Which I took to mean, not Hermione.) She also said, or > perhaps indicated it wouldn't be Harry. I'm not sure if that only > leaves Ron, or if it leaves any of the thousands of students who > attended Hogwarts at the same time as Harry. > Pippin: It's from 1999 http://www.quick-quote-quill.org/articles/1999/1099-connectiontransc2.htm JKR: Erm, well, because all your kids said hello so nicely in the background there, I'm going to give you information I haven't given anyone else, and I will tell you that one of the characters - er - one of - one of Harry's class mates, though it's not Harry himself, does end up a teacher at Hogwarts, but it is not maybe the one you'd think - hint, hint, hint! So, yes one of them does end up staying at Hogwarts, but - erm ... Lydon: Does the kids want to have a guess at it, Kathleen? Kathleen: Do you like to have a guess at who it is? Class: Ron Kathleen: They say Ron ... JKR: Noooo - it's not Ron ... Kathleen: [to class] it's not Ron ... JKR: ... because I can't see Ron as a teacher, no way. ----- Assuming Harry keeps his powers, IMO Ron and Harry will become Aurors, and Hermione will be a political activist, eventually becoming the first Muggle-born Minister of Magic. I think Neville will be the Hogwarts teacher. Pippin From kchuplis at alltel.net Tue Jan 24 14:44:06 2006 From: kchuplis at alltel.net (Karen) Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2006 08:44:06 -0600 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Professor R. J. Lupin (Was: ESE!Lupin condensed) References: Message-ID: <002c01c620f4$a0e0e480$b301010a@ConsolidatedTelephone.local> No: HPFGUIDX 146960 Finwitch: Obviously, at Hogwarts during Harry's third year! As for the briefcase with peeling gold letters - remember that Ollivander had such as well? And someone (I forget who) advertised such letters in QWC. He may well have bought that upon being hired, complete with the letters. OR - it was a gift from James&Sirius, 'professor' being a joke due to his reading-habits/being a prefect. Or *Dumbledore* gave it to him as a start-a-job-bonus or something like that... kchuplis: Or maybe when he got hired he was so proud that he finally got a "regular" job that as one little concession to his modesty he took his wand and inscribed his trunk with "Professor" RJ Lupin. Kind of sad in a way...... [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk Tue Jan 24 15:25:51 2006 From: gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk (Geoff Bannister) Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2006 15:25:51 -0000 Subject: Assuming they survive... In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146961 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Geoff Bannister" wrote: > > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Luckdragon" > wrote: > > > > Luckdragon: > > Any thoughts on what the Hogwarts students will choose for careers > > after Hogwarts. > > Harry-DADA Teacher at Hogwarts > > Ron-Wizard Chess Champion > > Hermione-magical creature equality rep. at M.O.M. > > Neville-Healer and discoverer of new medicinal plant properties. > > Ginny-Hogwarts Flying instructor and Quidditch ref. > > Arthur-M.O.M. > > Geoff: > Perhaps someone can confirm this but I have a feeling that JKR has > said that none of the puils will come back as teachers except perhaps > one but not Harry. > > I can't locate it in the various quotes sources > > Can someone use a "Point Me" spell please? Geoff: Hah! Answering my own question, I've found it... in an interview given on 12/10/99, the following exchange occurred: "Kathleen: Anyway, it's very exciting; we just love Harry Potter, so we're curious - well - first of all we can't wait for books four, five, six and seven [JKR: OK], but after that, we're curious as to whether Harry is going to have a life after Hogwarts? Or if maybe Harry might be a Hogwarts teacher? JKR: Erm, well, because all your kids said hello so nicely in the background there, I'm going to give you information I haven't given anyone else, and I will tell you that one of the characters - er - one of - one of Harry's class mates, though it's not Harry himself, does end up a teacher at Hogwarts, but it is not maybe the one you'd think - hint, hint, hint! So, yes one of them does end up staying at Hogwarts, but - erm ..." From belviso at attglobal.net Tue Jan 24 15:34:42 2006 From: belviso at attglobal.net (sistermagpie) Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2006 15:34:42 -0000 Subject: Snape again In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146962 Just carol: How does being the eavesdropper somehow go from being nothing > at all to a worse crime than revealing the Potters whereabouts to > Voldemort? Why is Snape (like Black before him) worthy of hatred and > PP isn't? Magpie: Well, I think a lot of it is human nature. I mean, imo, you see the same type of thing going on in fandom all the time, where you have the person you want to be guilty because you hate them and you start subtly shading everything about them to be more satisfying emotionally. Wormtail, for whatever reason, doesn't bother Harry so much in a superficial way so he doesn't focus as much on what he does, despite his being the biggest betrayer, most efficient DE and the character showing the least remorse. As you said, it's not just that Snape treats him badly, because so do other people. But with Snape everything about him angers Harry, so in his mind I think it just makes sense to follow those feelings. The eavesdropper wasn't important until it was Snape because it was JUST SO DAMNED SNAPE to be the eavesdropper. Suddenly it's got an emotional component to it. He can imagine Snape being all Snapey--and probably imagines him doing it just to spite Harry even though Harry hadn't been born yet. That Snape went to Dumbledore and tried to undo what he did means nothing--in fact, it would be great if that, too, could be cast in a sinister light. I mean, you see this sort of thing all the time when people discuss canon where either their language sort of editorializes the way events are presented or certain acts are exaggerated or diminished based on who it's satisfying to hate or give sympathy too. (Or sometimes the facts are even changed.) Sometimes when the accurate version is pointed out the response is: what difference does it make? But it does make a difference. Every little change adds up to distorting the picture and making you more likely to miss what's really going on. Nobody can be totally objective but characters in canon are all too good at throwing themselves into their bias completely and suffering for it. Snape is obviously a great example of this himself--he might have an Order of Merlin now if he'd listened to Harry and the others in the Shack, but I think Snape just found it so emotionally right that Sirius should be the traitor he didn't want it to be Peter. As for Harry's hatred of Sirius, he doesn't yet know that Snape is a DE--perhaps if he had things would have been different. I think first of all that Sirius is the first person Harry ever gets to focus on who's personally responsible for his father's death. It gives him someone to focus on personally in a way he's not yet able to focus on Snape. Later Sirius would seem to be replaced with Wormtail, but I think learning he was wrong about Sirius is such a blow that Harry isn't emotionally ready to just switch everything to Peter, especially since Peter is so different from Sirius. Plus at the end of PoA Harry's emotions then also are divided between feelings of revenge and feelings of hope--he's just discovered a godfather who cares about him. Snape wants to take that away. So I think a lot of it is, as funny as it sounds, personal preference. It's very much the way it works with the audience. We like or dislike characters based on a lot on instinct and then analyze them after that. I think both Snape and Sirius just resonante with Harry more as people. Before Harry knows Peter he connects him to Neville in his mind because he is a "Neville type." The Neville type just doesn't bother Harry, or inspire passionate feelings in him one way or the other. It's all about Harry in the end. Perhaps if he'd known the true story to begin with Harry might have focused his hatred on Peter the way he did with Sirius, but I don't know...he may have been more confused at how/why Peter could ever betray his father. In the book "The Alienist" there's something title character I think calls "the fallacy." It refers to sort of blind spots about human nature where we believe that certain things about our experiences are universal and so find it very hard to imagine them not being true. I think Harry may have certain associations with the type of boy Peter was (and Neville is) that makes it hard for him to see him as evil. Snape is the opposite. Sirius' basic personality had no such issues. -m From becks3uk at yahoo.co.uk Tue Jan 24 12:56:59 2006 From: becks3uk at yahoo.co.uk (Rebecca Williams) Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2006 12:56:59 +0000 (GMT) Subject: How did he know? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20060124125659.77965.qmail@web25306.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 146963 KJ wrote: > > I'm thinking that Grindelwald had something to do with Riddle's education. I don't think that he made his first horcrux until after he left school. JKR said that Grindelwald's death was important and he is listed as having died in 1945, Becky wrote: This may be true but I don't think JKR necessarily meant that Grindelwald was important to the Harry Potter books. She said that the date was significant and went on to say that events in the wizarding world were reflected in the muggle world. Therefore I believe she was saying that it was no coincidence that Grindelwald was defeated in 1945 (the date of the end of the 2nd world war). I think she was inferring that Grindelwald was Hitler or at least the wizard controlling him. Sorry, I don't have a link to the interview in question. From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Tue Jan 24 15:58:35 2006 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2006 15:58:35 -0000 Subject: Was eavesdropper unimportant to Harry? WAS: Re: Snape again In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146964 > Carol responds: > Later (in OoP), Harry finds out about the Prophecy and that someone > (the eavesdropper) revealed part of it to Voldemort. He has, IIRC, > almost no reaction to this information. He certainly doesn't react > with the anger he felt against Black earlier when he thought that > Black had betrayed his parents. The eavesdropper, as far as he's > concerned, is unimportant, just another detail related to the > Prophecy. But in HBP, he finds out that this seemingly unimportant > person was Snape, and immediately, the murderous rage is kindled > again. Alla: Right, I am not going to answer your main question about why Harry hates Snape and at one time hated Sirius more than Peter, because I can just voice my agreement with Amiable Dorsai and Lupinlore, but I just wanted to comment on this. I absolutely disagree that eavesdropper is not important to Harry till he learns that it was Snape. Could you refer me to canon where Harry says that he LIKES what eavesdropper did? Now, OF COURSE Harry reacts with rage when he learns that it was Snape. It is certainly adds to multitude of offenses which Snape IMO is guilty towards Harry, BUT I think that Harry would have reacted this way to ANYBODY who would have been an eavesdropper. It is just before the eavesdropper had no name and for all Harry knew IMO he could have been dead already. Now, Harry knows that the eavesdropper is alive and what do you know, the man who tormented him for five years in the classroom is the same man who played a VERY important role in his parents' death. No, I am not surprised at all. JMO, Alla From luckdragon64 at yahoo.ca Tue Jan 24 16:05:05 2006 From: luckdragon64 at yahoo.ca (Bee Chase) Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2006 11:05:05 -0500 (EST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Assuming they survive... In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20060124160506.30127.qmail@web53312.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 146965 > > Luckdragon: > > Any thoughts on what the Hogwarts students will choose for careers > > after Hogwarts. > > Harry-DADA Teacher at Hogwarts > > Ron-Wizard Chess Champion > > Hermione-magical creature equality rep. at M.O.M. > > Neville-Healer and discoverer of new medicinal plant properties. > > Ginny-Hogwarts Flying instructor and Quidditch ref. > > Arthur-M.O.M. > > Geoff: > Perhaps someone can confirm this but I have a feeling that JKR has > said that none of the puils will come back as teachers except perhaps > one but not Harry. > > I can't locate it in the various quotes sources > > Can someone use a "Point Me" spell please? Geoff: Hah! Answering my own question, I've found it... in an interview given on 12/10/99, the following exchange occurred: "Kathleen: Anyway, it's very exciting; we just love Harry Potter, so we're curious - well - first of all we can't wait for books four, five, six and seven [JKR: OK], but after that, we're curious as to whether Harry is going to have a life after Hogwarts? Or if maybe Harry might be a Hogwarts teacher? JKR: Erm, well, because all your kids said hello so nicely in the background there, I'm going to give you information I haven't given anyone else, and I will tell you that one of the characters - er - one of - one of Harry's class mates, though it's not Harry himself, does end up a teacher at Hogwarts, but it is not maybe the one you'd think - hint, hint, hint! So, yes one of them does end up staying at Hogwarts, but - erm ..." Luckdragon: Thanks to both Geoff & Pippin for pointing this quote out to me. No more Firewhiskey for me, I guess. Harry just got so much enjoyment teaching the DA that it was the first thing to come to mind. I could see him as a professional Quidditch player, but I'm not sure that would be fullfilling enough for him with his DADA skills. As for being an Auror, that is likely the best choice, but I fear he will end up looking like Mad Eye a few years down the road and that would not do. I also wonder if he will have had his fill of excitement and fighting when he is through with LV & his gang. Besides the WW will have to unite to fight LV, so what would they need Aurors for afterwards. Perhaps Harry will become the Muggle Prime Minister while Ginny becomes the WW M.O.M. and they will work together Harmoniously for the good of all. --------------------------------- Find your next car at Yahoo! Canada Autos [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From keeley_cargill at yahoo.com Tue Jan 24 13:54:49 2006 From: keeley_cargill at yahoo.com (keeley_cargill) Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2006 13:54:49 -0000 Subject: Assuming they survive... In-Reply-To: <20060123191357.3034.qmail@web30706.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146966 > > Luckdragon: > > Any thoughts on what the Hogwarts students will > > choose for careers Keeley: It's in canon that Harry will become Minister for Magic and have 12 children. Trelawney isn't always wrong! Keeley. From indiasjones at msn.com Tue Jan 24 16:33:12 2006 From: indiasjones at msn.com (india jones) Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2006 16:33:12 -0000 Subject: Assuming they survive--Neville/ herbology In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146967 Finwitch wrote: > And I think Neville would be excellent as a professor. > Nikki wrote: Yes, Neville would be a great Herbology professor but I really think he's going to be a healer and find a way to bring his parents around. In Chpt. 10 of OOTP Neville says that Mimbulus Mimbletonia does "loads of stuff" but we only find out that it's a great defensive mechanism, maybe another thing it does is to provide cures. Nikki From actorlady2001 at yahoo.com Tue Jan 24 16:51:55 2006 From: actorlady2001 at yahoo.com (ActorLady) Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2006 08:51:55 -0800 (PST) Subject: Assuming they survive... In-Reply-To: <20060124160506.30127.qmail@web53312.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20060124165155.77894.qmail@web33301.mail.mud.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 146968 Since JKR said it's not who we think that becomes a teacher, then let's assume it's the most unlikely character...maybe Ron will become a teacher at Hogwarts, now what he'll teach..hummmm..I have no idea...thoughts?? As far as Harry, an auror is what i've always thought but JKR likes to throw us curve balls so we'll see. Hermione, now her I see becoming MOM. She's just so very smart. JKR says that more will die...maybe Neville. Maybe LV kills hime since he was "the other choice"? The twins, yes I agree that they are going to become very wealthy. JKR has made such a point of telling us in each book how poor the Weasley's are. Ginny...I hope she and Harry marry and live "happily ever after" ..I'm unsure but I think she just may become an auror as well...then she and Harry can become the next "Batman & Cat Woman" LOL I wait eagerly for book 7 yet I don't want the day to come because once i have that book in my hands, within a few days it will be over...and I dread that more!! ActorLady. From indiasjones at msn.com Tue Jan 24 12:55:14 2006 From: indiasjones at msn.com (india jones) Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2006 12:55:14 -0000 Subject: Assuming they survive...-ginger In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146969 > > Allie: > > is this a British thing, because I don't get all the ginger > > references... > > Geoff: > Could be JKR herself having a passion for ginger..... Nikki: JKR has been going through pregnancy while writing some of the books, I know that ginger tea is a cure for morning sickness, maybe that's why she writes about it becausew it helped her through some bad mornings. From nrenka at yahoo.com Tue Jan 24 17:11:30 2006 From: nrenka at yahoo.com (nrenka) Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2006 17:11:30 -0000 Subject: Snape again In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146970 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "amiabledorsai" wrote: > I doubt that Harry has forgotten Peter's crimes. But Peter isn't an > immediate problem. As they say--location, location, location. Snape's immediacy (as opposed to Peter's absence) has a lot to do with it, I agree. > Peter doesn't enjoy the confidence of Harry's mentor and protector. I don't think we should underestimate that for Harry, Dumbledore's protection of Snape is a profound wound, betrayal of trust. Here Dumbledore is cosseting someone responsible for so much--but the kicker is that when Harry raises what are to him perfectly reasonable questions, Dumbledore won't even explain why. (That also hurts, because it can say "I don't trust you with this knowledge.") I don't know about you all, but that would probably make me rather angry, especially when it seems then that the mentor figure is taken down by that very course of action. > I'm agnostic about Snape. Same here. :) I don't know if this plays into Harry's perceptions, but here's something else which I do think matters, which is our perception of each person's character. Wormtail has done awful things--very true. But he's also currently subservient, chained, despised. Snape, on the other hand, is in a position (or maybe more than one) of trust and authority. He's never shown (to Harry) any signs of remorse, but he also seems to have the strength of character to make his own choices, to carry out what he intends. With Peter, I'm also somewhat agnostic about diagnosing his motivations. Weakness? Self-aggrandizement? Profound nasty streak that goes well-hidden? I dunno, but there's a difference there. Oy, that was a long mostly "I think that's perceptive" post. :) -Nora wishes she could sing heroic bass roles for her class From kennclark at btinternet.com Tue Jan 24 15:55:56 2006 From: kennclark at btinternet.com (Kenneth Clark) Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2006 15:55:56 -0000 Subject: Do any list members think Dumbledore might have asked Snape to kill him? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146971 Corey wrote: > > Are any list members of the view that Dumbledore might have > > asked Snape to kill Dumbledore because he was dying anyway? > Beatrice: > > 2. In previous books, Dumbledore has indicated that he is not > afraid of death, > 4. Some think that DD is not dead. Dumbledore and the Phoenix. What do Phoenixes do when they die? Remember the flames at Dumbledore's funeral? When did/will Dumbledore reappear out of his ashes? Kenneth From newbrigid at yahoo.com Tue Jan 24 16:24:31 2006 From: newbrigid at yahoo.com (Lia) Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2006 08:24:31 -0800 (PST) Subject: Pity for Wormtail (was Re: Snape again) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20060124162431.62294.qmail@web31707.mail.mud.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 146973 Emily wrote: >> I'm reminded forcefully of Frodo's reaction to Gollum in LOTR when he does finally see him: "I do pity him." I think, even though PP did all these terrible things, Harry pities him for the control LV has over his life. He is repulsed by him, sure, but he recognizes that Peter lacks any strength of character at all, and I think (not at all canon here) he subconsciously counts Peter as another Voldemort casualty. Also, I think Harry knows Peter is a puppet for LV, but Snape is different. Harry knows Snape has strength to choose. This is what makes Snape so powerful, and so dangerous. He does not seem to fear Voldemort, even less so than, say, Lucius, and he does not seem to worship him a la Bellatrix. He only seems to have loyalty to himself and his own aims, whether those be to torment Harry or to follow Voldie. This is, IMO, why *we* have so much trouble figuring Snape out: whomever he is serving, be it LV, DD, or himself, it seems definite he is doing it consciously and for his own purposes. << I also have thought of the similarities between Harry's reaction to Wormtail and Frodo's reaction to Gollum more than once. I might add here that at the near-end of LOTR, Frodo reacts in much the same way to one Wormtongue, who's in thrall to Saruman. (Funny that the names share the "prefix".) Harry recognizes two important things: first, that Wormtail is actually pitiable; second, that, being wretched (though markedly despicable), Wormtail is not worth Lupin and Sirius splitting their souls over (for that is, as we find out later, exactly what they'd be doing). Pettigrew/Wormtail, like Gollum (or Wormtongue), is two within one, someone good who's gone bad, the once loyal now a betrayer, etc.; not one to risk one's soul for, methinks. However, given the direct and personal nature of his transgressions, Harry is right to feel a bit less merciful than Frodo and thus willing to see Pettigrew/Wormtail in Azkaban. Snape IS a wild card, isn't he? I've noticed, too, that he doesn't seem to fear LV quite as much as the other DEs; what he expresses is more like an acknowledgment of LV's skill and power. I don't think this indicates that he's ESE, though, as Dumbledore himself noted the same things. Interesting note about CHOICE...as it is "our choices that make us who we truly are, more than our abilities" (I know, bad paraphrase, but I'm at work and can't check the exact wording, alas!) (By the way, I personally think that Snape might be DDM; his boasting in "Spinner's End" and Dumbledore's out-of-character pleading point toward it, among other thing, and something didn't seem quite right with all of it...we shall see next year, I reckon!) ---Lia From rkdas at charter.net Tue Jan 24 17:42:08 2006 From: rkdas at charter.net (susanbones2003) Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2006 17:42:08 -0000 Subject: Sirius' death (was: Re: ESE!Lupin condensed) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146975 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "susanbones2003" wrote: > > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Maria Elmvang > wrote: > > > > susanbones2003 wrote: > > > > I was also left cold the the speed at which Sirius (and his > meaning, > > > > affect on Harry, the whole arc) was disposed of. I wondered and > > > > still do if that is a harbinger of things to come. Usefulness > over, > > > > character gone and forgotten. She does have quite a bit on her plate without getting in too deep. > > > kchuplis: > > > I admire the speed and finality of death in these books. They > are just > > > very realistic. BIG SNIP! > > Maria next: > > I respectfully disagree, Karen. Sirius' death did not touch me *at > all*. I > > liked Sirius' character, but his entire death was just such a 'non-> event'> > that - like Susan - it left me cold. I actually had to go back and > reread > > the last few pages to even realize *that* he'd died... I remember > the next> > chapter starting out with something like "Harry couldn't believe > Sirius was > > dead" (or something similar - sorry, I don't have the book here), > and I> > thought "Huh? He died?"... oh yeah... he 'fell through the veil'. I was touched by both Cedric and Dumbledore's death, so I think it > was just> > a spot of bad writing on JKR's behalf (but then, OotP is so far my least favourite of the HP books that I'm inclined to say I dislike it). After having known for the entire book that somebody was going to die, it was just too anti- climatic. > > > > > > And since I'm writing - to touch upon the original topic. I, for > one, > > definitely DON'T believe in ESE!Lupin. First of all, I have yet to > see any > > convincing evidence. Secondly, book 7 has a finite length. JKR > will be hard > > pressed to tie up all loose threads as it is, without introducing > a new > > (long) plot-twist. > > Just my two cents. > > Maria > > > > -- > > I believe in God like I believe in the sun > > not because I see it, but by it > > I see everything else > > --- C.S. Lewis > > Hi Maria! > I loved your C.S. Lewis quotation at the end of your note and had to > give you kudos for choosing it! Also appreciated your comments about > OOTP. It's a tough book in so many many ways. I am listening to it > just now because I am least familiar with it. I am reserving > judgement on how JKR treats Sirius until the publication of Book 7. > It is my deepest hope that whilst JKR has not flinched in doing the > hard things, that she will not advance the story at the cost of > character development! She does have quite a bit to clear up but I > will find it very unsatisfactory if we were made to love and root > for Sirius and she leaves us with no more about him. I do have to > say, it's her book and I really can't make her write what I want, > but I am very much hoping for something more to help our resolution > of feelings and not just actions. Jen D. (aka "Susan Bones") > From duckyslilangel_2 at yahoo.com Tue Jan 24 17:32:42 2006 From: duckyslilangel_2 at yahoo.com (Amber) Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2006 09:32:42 -0800 (PST) Subject: Assuming they survive... -- teacher at Hogwarts In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20060124173243.42576.qmail@web52114.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 146976 Pippin: > Assuming Harry keeps his powers, IMO Ron and Harry will > become Aurors, and Hermione will be a political activist, > eventually becoming the first Muggle-born Minister of Magic. > I think Neville will be the Hogwarts teacher. Amber: JKR has said the person who is going to be a teacher would be someone that we won't expect. Has anyone thought of Luna? No one would expect her to stay on and teach. Just IMO though. From heos at virgilio.it Tue Jan 24 17:52:47 2006 From: heos at virgilio.it (chrusotoxos) Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2006 17:52:47 -0000 Subject: No Weasley will be harmed now Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146977 Hi, I'm not even sure I posted this theory here, and it had been ignored on other sites, but I still find amusing that, as I said beforehand, Bill was injured in this book. Nw the Weasleys should be safe, check this out: Theory: Weasleys with Arthurian names are in trouble, the others are safe. Arthur in trouble (Nagini), Molly safe. William in trouble (Greyback), Charlie safe. Perceval in trouble (fake Crouch) - more trouble to follow? Fred and George safe, Ronald safe, Ginevra in trouble (diary). So smile, you friends of Ron, he won't be harmed. From heos at virgilio.it Tue Jan 24 18:00:58 2006 From: heos at virgilio.it (chrusotoxos) Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2006 18:00:58 -0000 Subject: Do any list members think Dumbledore might have asked Snape to kill him? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146978 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Kenneth Clark" wrote: > > Corey wrote: > > > Are any list members of the view that Dumbledore might have > > > asked Snape to kill Dumbledore because he was dying anyway? > > > Beatrice: > > > > 2. In previous books, Dumbledore has indicated that he is not > > afraid of death, > > 4. Some think that DD is not dead. > > > Dumbledore and the Phoenix. > What do Phoenixes do when they die? > Remember the flames at Dumbledore's funeral? > When did/will Dumbledore reappear out of his ashes? > > Kenneth > now chrusotoxos DD IS dead, I don't see why he shouldn't be. His role as a character was finished, Harry knows enough to be on his own now. DD poisoned himself with that potion (if LV did it, I don't see him as the type who would concot a harmless potion) for the good cause, and then asked Snape to kill him because he wanted to spare Draco from doing it. Phoenixes do reborn, but rebirth can take different ways. And there is a portrait of DD at Hogwarts already... From heos at virgilio.it Tue Jan 24 18:06:24 2006 From: heos at virgilio.it (chrusotoxos) Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2006 18:06:24 -0000 Subject: Pity for Wormtail (was Re: Snape again) In-Reply-To: <20060124162431.62294.qmail@web31707.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146979 >This is what makes Snape so powerful, and so dangerous. He does not seem to fear Voldemort, even less so than, say, Lucius, and he does not seem to worship him a la Bellatrix. He only seems to have loyalty to himself and his own aims, whether those be to torment Harry or to follow Voldie. << >Snape IS a wild card, isn't he? I've noticed, too, that he doesn't seem to fear LV quite as much as the other DEs; what he expresses is more like an acknowledgment of LV's skill and power.< chrusotoxos: I don't agree on this point. After all, we never saw Snape in front of LV. Snape knows how to survive, and I don't think he'd be allowed to if he was a DE and showing indifference to LV. Bellatrix is mad, she doesn't count as an exemple. But I'm sure Snape would be well behaved like other DE - the difference, maybe, is that he's considered more important by LV (potions' skill? although he himself boasts about his importance as a spy...) But I so long to see him with Voldie... :D From gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk Tue Jan 24 18:05:52 2006 From: gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk (Geoff Bannister) Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2006 18:05:52 -0000 Subject: No Weasley will be harmed now In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146980 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "chrusotoxos" wrote: > Theory: Weasleys with Arthurian names are in trouble, the others are safe. > > Arthur in trouble (Nagini), Molly safe. > William in trouble (Greyback), Charlie safe. > Perceval in trouble (fake Crouch) - more trouble to follow? > Fred and George safe, Ronald safe, Ginevra in trouble (diary). Geoff: Just to give the carpet under you a yank, I don't recall a William in the Arthurian legend.... From sherriola at earthlink.net Tue Jan 24 18:51:42 2006 From: sherriola at earthlink.net (Sherry Gomes) Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2006 10:51:42 -0800 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Sirius' death (was: Re: ESE!Lupin condensed) In-Reply-To: <17785fc30601240407q17f95a3evdfff883023d0b3bc@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <004601c62117$38764fc0$0400a8c0@pensive> No: HPFGUIDX 146981 Maria next: I respectfully disagree, Karen. Sirius' death did not touch me *at all*. I liked Sirius' character, but his entire death was just such a 'non-event' that - like Susan - it left me cold. I actually had to go back and reread the last few pages to even realize *that* he'd died... I remember the next chapter starting out with something like "Harry couldn't believe Sirius was dead" (or something similar - sorry, I don't have the book here), and I thought "Huh? He died?"... oh yeah... he 'fell through the veil'. I was touched by both Cedric and Dumbledore's death, so I think it was just a spot of bad writing on JKR's behalf (but then, OotP is so far my least favourite of the HP books that I'm inclined to say I dislike it). After having known for the entire book that somebody was going to die, it was just too anti-climatic. Maria Sherry now: I had a completely opposite reaction. oh my, Sirius murder was devastating to me. After all his anguish, the 12 years in Azkaban, then his freedom snatched away in moments, his inability to help Harry, his anguish over the fate of the Potters ... wow, it shook me to have him die as abruptly and brutally as he did. and even more so, because Harry witnessed it. And it was really Harry's reaction that got to me, touched me and broke my heart. His reactions seemed so perfectly right on, his denial, his desire to rush behind the veil, his cries for Sirius, his belief that Sirius would just reappear, Lupin having to hold him back ... i found all of that very powerful. in fact, in an odd way, Dumbledore's death didn't get me as much. It was terrible in terms of shock value, but that was more because of how it happened, than the fact that it did happen. after all, it was very much expected that Dumbledore would be the one to die in this book. Sherry From luckdragon64 at yahoo.ca Tue Jan 24 18:59:27 2006 From: luckdragon64 at yahoo.ca (Bee Chase) Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2006 13:59:27 -0500 (EST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] No Weasley will be harmed now In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20060124185927.31625.qmail@web53311.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 146982 chrusotoxos wrote: Hi, I'm not even sure I posted this theory here, and it had been ignored on other sites, but I still find amusing that, as I said beforehand, Bill was injured in this book. Nw the Weasleys should be safe, check this out: Theory: Weasleys with Arthurian names are in trouble, the others are safe. Arthur in trouble (Nagini), Molly safe. William in trouble (Greyback), Charlie safe. Perceval in trouble (fake Crouch) - more trouble to follow? Fred and George safe, Ronald safe, Ginevra in trouble (diary). So smile, you friends of Ron, he won't be harmed. Luckdragon: I don't recall Percy's life being endangered by either Crouch. If your theory is correct I think Percy is more likely to get a wake up call in book 7 and any attempt on his life may finally bring the prodigal son home. --------------------------------- Find your next car at Yahoo! Canada Autos [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From olivier.fouquet+harry at m4x.org Tue Jan 24 19:14:42 2006 From: olivier.fouquet+harry at m4x.org (olivierfouquet2000) Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2006 19:14:42 -0000 Subject: The Secret Revealed! ESE!Arthur In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146983 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "amiabledorsai" wrote: > > Amiable Dorsai: > I give you ESEvilest!Molly. Tremble before her! > > Amiable "Got a new job at the Quibbler" Dorsai > Ah non, je proteste, ESE!Arthur is much more convincing. Who engineered a fight so that TR's diary got in the wrong hands? Who conveniently fell asleep so that Harry would be convinced his visions in OoP were not only accurate but also important, thereby allowing the final trap and causing Sirius' death? Who imperioed Sturgis Podmore while waiting outside Harry's hearing? Who tried to have Harry expelled by getting the time of the hearing wrong? Who let Harry know about Sirius to awaken his curiosity? Who is this pureblood whose resentment is obvious in every book thus far (there is a mention of Arthur being disastified with his job and the way he is treated in *every book*), and thus a perfect candidate to wear a hood? Who wasn't in the original order and about whom did Dumbledore had doubts while forming the new one (*Am I right* in thinking that I can count on you and Arthur? GoF)? Who was complimented by Fake!Moody for his talent with the Imperius curse (Your father would *know* that one GoF)? Who was conspicuous only by his absence during the major fights? Forget ESE!Lupin, make way to ESE!Arthur Olivier From rdoliver30 at yahoo.com Tue Jan 24 19:09:02 2006 From: rdoliver30 at yahoo.com (lupinlore) Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2006 19:09:02 -0000 Subject: Why would Harry want to work for the Ministry? (was Re: Assuming they survive... In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146984 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "pippin_999" wrote: > ----- > > Assuming Harry keeps his powers, IMO Ron and Harry will > become Aurors, and Hermione will be a political activist, > eventually becoming the first Muggle-born Minister of Magic. > I think Neville will be the Hogwarts teacher. I agree that this seems a likely outcome, based on the overall arc and pattern of the story. The problem is that it just doesn't seem to make very much sense based on what we know about the situation in the Wizarding World at the moment. Assuming Voldemort is dead or rendered harmless at the end of the series -- which I think is a very safe assumption -- why would Harry, of all people, want to work at the Ministry, of all places? That would mean, if nothing changes radically in Book VII, placing himself once again under the authority of Dolores Umbridge, who still occupies a place of high power in the Ministry. It would also mean working for Scrimgeour, whom he gave the metaphorical finger in Book VI. Finally, given that Scrimgeour was the Head of the Auror Office, the Auror Corps would not seem to be a very well-run or congenial organization, and certainly not the most advantageous place for opposing Dark Wizards. Now, if -- for instance -- we see radical shifts in the Ministry in Book VII, such as Arthur Weasley becoming Minister, Dolores Umbridge being carted off, and Kingsley Shacklebolt becoming Head of the Auror Office, then the picture would shift greatly. But barring such changes, I would say Harry, or for that matter Ron, would have to take complete leave of their senses to want to work for the Aurors. Lupinlore From whtwitch91 at yahoo.com Tue Jan 24 19:44:58 2006 From: whtwitch91 at yahoo.com (whtwitch91) Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2006 19:44:58 -0000 Subject: Assuming they survive...Snape Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146985 I'm one of the "Snape is DDM" people and I believe he will survive the last book, but will be so notorious he will have to flee the country and eventually arrive in New Jersey where he will be employeed in one of the many chemical labs. In North Jersey his abrasive personality will be so unremarkable that he will fit right in. Sue, a Jersey girl From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Tue Jan 24 20:12:03 2006 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2006 20:12:03 -0000 Subject: Sirius' death /Dumbledore's death In-Reply-To: <004601c62117$38764fc0$0400a8c0@pensive> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146986 > > Sherry now: > > I had a completely opposite reaction. oh my, Sirius murder was devastating to me. Alla: Me too of course. :-) Sherry: > in fact, in an odd way, Dumbledore's death didn't get me as much. It was > terrible in terms of shock value, but that was more because of how it > happened, than the fact that it did happen. after all, it was very much > expected that Dumbledore would be the one to die in this book. > > Alla: I cannot believe that I finally found an issue I sort of disagree with you on. :-) I did not expect Dumbledore's death to hit me hard, because as you said - it was pretty much expected that he will die in this book and because I was quite angry with him at the end of OOP, so I thought that no way I would be as upset as I was over Sirius' death. Boy, was I wrong. JKR made me care for Dumbledore all over again in HBP. She made him "human" and what is the most important - I believed in it. The fact that Dumbledore allowed himself to be close to Harry this book, to show Harry how much he loves the boy and admires him made all the difference to me. I saw the good man, struggling to help survive the boy whom he loves dearly and at the same time remembering that he has to fight for the whole WW too. When Dumbledore was screaming after that potion I wanted to hug him, I wanted to help him when he was pleading with Snape and did I mention that I wanted to strangle Snape after he disposed of Dumbledore? In my mind, I was hoping that Harry will bring Dumbledore's killer to justice, but of course I knew that there is one more book left. So, yes, Dumbledore's death upset me just as much as Sirius' did and I WAS applauding JKR's talent for that. JMO, Alla From gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk Tue Jan 24 20:49:09 2006 From: gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk (Geoff Bannister) Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2006 20:49:09 -0000 Subject: The Secret Revealed! ESE!Arthur In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146987 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "olivierfouquet2000" wrote: > > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "amiabledorsai" wrote: > > > > Amiable Dorsai: > > I give you ESEvilest!Molly. Tremble before her! > > > > Amiable "Got a new job at the Quibbler" Dorsai Olivier: > Ah non, je proteste, ESE!Arthur is much more convincing. > Who engineered a fight so that TR's diary got in the wrong hands? Who conveniently fell > asleep so that Harry would be convinced his visions in OoP were not only accurate but also > important, thereby allowing the final trap and causing Sirius' death? Geoff: But how do you explain Harry's vision of the attack in OOTP? Surely Arthur couldn't produce the impression which Harry had of being the snake? And how do Arthur's injuries which brought him to St.Mungo's fit in with this intriguing theory? He was supposed to have wounds that would not heal properly for example. Had he got nurses who were secret supporters with him? Or were they under the Imperius curse? If so, he had been very busy with his wand. From horridporrid03 at yahoo.com Tue Jan 24 21:13:11 2006 From: horridporrid03 at yahoo.com (horridporrid03) Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2006 21:13:11 -0000 Subject: Why Tom left Merope /Draco and Harry In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146988 > >>>Betsy Hp: > > Actually, I think Tom Riddle left his "wife" because he finally > > realized that she'd used either a mind-altering potion or a mind- > > Altering spell to kidnap and repeatedly rape him. > >>Alla: > Correct, but this is a smaller revelation, the larger revelation > is that Merope is a witch and I don't remember that Tom Riddle > knew that. > Betsy Hp: Yes, but it was the kidnapping and raping that turned Tom off Merope. And it was the spell or potion that turned Tom onto her. Tom didn't leave Merope because she was a witch. He left her because she'd used him so horribly. Merope didn't rape Tom *because* she was a witch. Being a witch *enabled* her to rape him. If Tom had fallen in love with Merope all on his own he may well have stayed after the big reveal. But Tom didn't love Merope. He never loved Merope. And her treatment of him guaranteed he would never come to love her. Compare that to say, Seamus's parents where the big reveal was a surprise but not a horror. > >>Alla: > Personally I see a lot of similarities between Draco and Dudley. > Dudley is engaged in 'Harry hunting", Draco seems to be very happy > to engage in "Hermione hunting" in CoS and then adds Ron to the > mix. Betsy Hp: So the fact that Draco dislikes someone means he's just like Dudley? Wouldn't that mean that Harry is just like Dudley? Sirius is just like Dudley? Ron is just like Dudley? (I could go on and on.) Because I really don't recall this "Hermione hunting" you speak of. Did Draco ever chase after Hermione, with a gang of supporters, intent on doing her physical harm? Did he ever do such things to Ron? > >>Alla: > Dudley is Muggle type of bully, Draco is a Wizard type of bully, > not only bully, but the one who seems to be willing to go further > than words into actions. IMO of course. Betsy Hp: Hmmm, I know Draco is often referred to as a bully, but I'm not sure there's any instinces of Draco bullying in canon. He's cruel to Neville a few times, but I don't recall him ever coming near the type of bullying we see Dudley engaged in. Draco doesn't stick people in toilets. I don't recall him ever hunting down weaker children to use as punching bags. He *says* some rather nasty stuff to Hermione, but Hermione never seems to feel physically threatened. And yes, Draco knows how to get Ron riled up, but again, it's not a case of a much stronger Draco physically attacking the much weaker Ron. > >>Alla: > So, no I don't see much difference between them at all. And of > course Draco's "I'll bully father into getting me one" reminds > Harry of Dudley wanting more and more presents. Mistake? > Personally I don't think so. JMO of course. Betsy Hp: Could you point out the canon where Draco *succeeds* in "bullying" his father into buying him that broom for his first year? Because if Dudley wanted a broom, Dudley would have gotten a broom. Actually, I'd say JKR bends over backwords to show us that Harry's first impression of Draco being just like Dudley is quite wrong. When Dudley doesn't do well in school, he's praised for not being a nerd. But when Draco doesn't do as well as Lucius expects him to, he's dressed down in front of a store clerk. That strikes me as two very different boys with two very different fathers. > >>Betsy Hp: > > Draco makes the mistake of thinking making fun of Hagrid > > would amuse Harry (too bad it wasn't Filch peering in the > > window). > >>Alla: > How do you know that? How do you know that Draco insults Hagrid > because he wants to amuse Harry? > Betsy Hp: Because Draco calls Harry's attention to Hagrid and because Draco likes to be amusing. And because, quite frankly, Hagrid is a rather amusing character. > >>Alla: > The way I see it Draco already has his opinion of Hagrid before he > knew who Hagrid was. When Draco sees Hagrid at first, he is just > surprised, but when Draco hears who THAT man is, oh then he spits > the words of contempt right away. > Betsy Hp: When did Draco spit? I don't recall any spitting. Your quote certainly doesn't have any spitting in it. And of course Draco's heard about Hagrid. His father is on the Hogwarts board of governors, so I'm sure Draco has heard plenty of tales about Hagrid getting drunk and doing silly things with his umbrella. Per canon Hagrid does get drunk and per canon Hagrid can take some rather foolish actions (Norbert). I'm not sure why pointing that out means that Draco is either prejudiced (against what exactly?) or judgemental. Think about what Ron might have said if he were in the shop and Snape or Filch were peering through the window. Heck, Ron may well have said the same things about Hagrid. I'm sure Ron had heard a few stories himself, what with his brothers and all. > >>Alla: > That's the point, IMO. Because he did not know who Harry Potter > was, Draco shows him his ugly inner self by insulting ALL > muggleborn witches and wizards. > Betsy Hp: Wow! I didn't realize you disliked Draco so strongly. I mean, yes I knew you didn't like him all that much, but you've pretty much written him off entirely, yes? So Draco's beliefs about Muggleborns aren't because he's been raised to think a certain way and has never had that sort of thinking challenged, but because deep inside Draco is just a horrible, ugly, little boy. Draco *does* display his prejudices. And Ron does not display his. So Harry befriends Ron, and when Ron recoils from Hagrid because he's a half-giant, and when Ron is repulsed by Lupin being a werewolf, and when Ron thinks it's fitting that Filch is a squib, Harry forgives him and gives Ron a chance to realize that Hagrid is still Hagrid and Lupin is all right too. But Draco is such a lost cause anyway, it's best that Harry have nothing to do with him. The Sorting Hat is completely wrong, and Dumbledore is a fool. > >>Betsy Hp: > > And Draco was merely curious about the boy in the shop. > Alla: > Till he found out that that boy's parents were of the "wrong kind". Betsy Hp: When did that occur? Harry tells Draco that his parents are the right kind. They're both wizards. Betsy Hp From bboyminn at yahoo.com Tue Jan 24 21:24:25 2006 From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2006 21:24:25 -0000 Subject: Do any list members think Dumbledore might have asked Snape to kill him? In-Reply-To: <000001c62047$f28754c0$7f56a4ac@Overton> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146989 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Corey Overton" wrote: > > Hi list members, how's it going? Are any list members of the > view that Dumbledore might have asked Snape to kill Dumbledore > because he was dying anyway? I think Snape killed Dumbledore > because he's with Voldemort. Just wondering what people think. > > Your fellow member, > Corey > bboyminn: Despite how many times this has been discussed, I doubt that it can every be resolved until we have the last book. Even then, it may not be completely resolved. Personally, I resist all speculation that Dumbledore and Snape sat down and conspired for Snape to kill Dumbledore. That is too far fetched and most unlikely. However, I don't have a problem with Dumbledore impressing on Snape that Harry's life was of vital important, and that Harry's life was more valuable than even his own (Dumbledore's that is). First, stop and think of how that conspiritorial conversation would have gone. Dumbledore calls Snape to his office and says - "I've got a great idea. First, we talk Draco into fixing the vanishing cabinet. Then we bring a pack of marauding Death Eaters into the castle. Then you suggest that the DE's set off the Dark Mark at the top of the tower. Then when I show up, you rush to the tower and kill me. It's foolproof. What could go wrong?" Sorry, but that is far too unlikely a plan for me or Snape to ever swallow, or for Dumbledore to ever conceive. However, in that final moment at the top of the tower, I can see Dumbledore saying "...Severus ...please ...you understand the situation. You know there is only one 'best' way out. Do what you know you must do to salvage this situation and protect the innocent (meaning Harry and Draco). Do what you know will produce the best possible outcome in the struggle against Voldemort." I assume there was a degree of Legilimency involved, but I think the bulk of it stems from Dumbledore's earlier emphasis that Harry's well being must be protected AT ALL COSTS, and the cost in that terrible moment was Dumbledore's life. Beside, between the Cave Potion and the Dead Hand Curse, I think Dumbledore was fading fast. I think his time on this earth was already limited, so his death didn't represent the loss of a full rich life ahead. It represented the loss of the life of a person who had already lived a long, full, rich life that was greatly rewarding and very satisfying. Dumbledore knew he had lived his life and done his share to make a better world, and while he did not welcome death, he also did not fear it. I very much believe that this was an 'in the moment' thing. In that moment both Snape and Dumbledore realized that there was only one safe, productive, and effective way out. Snape weighed the stituation and took the only workable option he had - he killed Dumbledore. In killing Dumbledore, their main objective, the DE's no longer had a reason to stay in the castle, they no longer had a reason to cause further death and destruction. So, Snape killed Dumbledore and got Draco and the rest of the DE's out of the castle. Further, in his own nasty way, Snape protected Harry on the way out. He only used defensive curses against Harry, and he stopped the other DE's from attacking Harry. Yes, Dumbledore is dead, BUT ONLY Dumbledore is dead. It could have been much worse if Dumbledore had chosen to fight, or had forced Snape to turn against the DE's in that moment. I think regardless of Snape's choice, Dumbledore was certain to die. So, Snape and Dumbledore's choice was the choice of least destruction and death, and further, it was the choice that left Snape in the best position to continue to help. So, Dumbledore is dead. I see no point in his continued existance, and we must remember that Dumbledore is not truly gone. We still have his protrait, and while it is far from the original living Dumbledore, he is still there to impart wisdom on Harry and others. We know that the Portraits are limted, JKR said as much, but we also know that they have very strong personalities and are capable of complex communication. I believe Dumbledore continues on in the story though his protrait, and, little as it is, we can take some comfort in that. Just a few thoughts. Steve/bboyminn From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Tue Jan 24 21:45:08 2006 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2006 21:45:08 -0000 Subject: Was the eavesdropper unimportant to Harry? WAS: Re: Snape again In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146990 Carol earlier: > > > Later (in OoP), Harry finds out about the Prophecy and that someone (the eavesdropper) revealed part of it to Voldemort. He has, IIRC, almost no reaction to this information. He certainly doesn't react with the anger he felt against Black earlier when he thought that Black had betrayed his parents. The eavesdropper, as far as he's concerned, is unimportant, just another detail related to the Prophecy. But in HBP, he finds out that this seemingly unimportant person was Snape, and immediately, the murderous rage is kindled again. > > > Alla: > > Right, I am not going to answer your main question about why Harry hates Snape and at one time hated Sirius more than Peter, because I can just voice my agreement with Amiable Dorsai and Lupinlore, but I just wanted to comment on this. I absolutely disagree that eavesdropper is not important to Harry till he learns that it was Snape. Could you refer me to canon where Harry says that he LIKES what eavesdropper did? > Carol responds: Alla, I'm a bit surprised that you'd put words in my mouth. :-) I never said that Harry "LIKES what the eavesdropper did." He'd be insane to *like* it. I said "he has, IIRC, almost no reaction to the information." Very different from liking it, right? As for canon that he has almost no reaction (which is what I really said), how about this? Dumbledore tells Harry that LV's information about the Prophecy was incomplete because "the eavesdropper was detected only a short way into the prophecy and thrown from the building." Instead of saying, "What eavesdropper? What are you talking about?" Harry only says, "So he only heard . . . ?" and DD finishes the thought: "He heard only the first part . . . . Consequently, he could not warn his master that to attack you would be to risk transferring powers to you" (OoP Am. ed. 843). The conversation then shifts back to Voldemort and the eavesdropper is not brought up again. DD, of course, doesn't want to call attention to him, but *Harry* clearly doesn't regard him as important at this point. Certainly he doesn't blame him for his parents' deaths. He focuses on the transfer of power(s) idea instead. The eavesdropper is not brought up again. (Neither is the betrayer, PP, who seems to have faded from the picture.) In a nutshell, here's what I'm trying to say. In books 1 and 2, Harry sees only one person as responsible for the death of his parents, their true murderer, Voldemort. In PoA, the focus shifts to the supposed betrayer, Sirius Black, whom Harry hates with a murderous rage after he finds out that Black was his parents' friend. After he finds that the real betrayer was Peter Pettigrew, also his parents' friend, he does *not* hate PP in the same way. (He does feel that PP deserves to have his soul sucked out, but he also prevents Lupin and Black from killing him, whereas he was ready to kill Black himself with his bare hands.) The personal element, the rage and the hatred, disappears at this point. So does the significance of the betrayer, even though the resurrection of Voldemort is his doing. The blame for the Potters' deaths reverts to Voldemort (where it chiefly belongs), as shown by the discussion in OoP partially quoted above. When Harry finds out that a third person, the eavesdropper, had a role in his parents' death, his anger and hatred don't shift to that person. What's important to Harry at that point is Voldemort's interpretation of the Prophecy, Voldemort's decision to "try and kill me as a baby" rather than "wait[ing] to see whether Neville or I looked more dangerous when we were older and tr[ying] to kill one of us then" (843). *Harry doesn't see the eavesdropper as more important, more worthy of hatred than the betrayer or Voldemort himself, until he finds out that it's Snape.* So, just as he had shifted most if not all of the blame for his parents' deaths from Voldemort to the supposed betrayer Sirius Black in PoA (but did not do so for PP, who is guilty of the crimes Harry thought Black had committed--and more, as of GoF), he now shifts most if not all of the blame to Snape, with Voldemort almost forgotten and Wormtail entirely so. Yes, of course, there's a personal element. Harry *wants* to hate Snape, *wants* him to be guilty of every possible crime. But he also violently hated Sirius Black when he thought him guilty of betraying and therefore "killing" his parents. Why hate Black and not Pettigrew for the exact same crimes when both PP and SB were his father's friends? (I hold with the "vermin" theory myself. Interesting that Snape holds the same view.) So here's the thing. The betrayer, the friend of Harry's parents who revealed their secret hiding place to Voldemort, is extremely important when he's Sirius Black. He becomes next to nothing when he's Wormtail. The eavesdropper, who could not have known who the unborn children were or how LV would interpret the Prophecy, is unimportant to Harry when his identity is unknown (surely because, unlike the betrayer, he's not directly connected to the murder of the Potters, nor is he responsible for LV's interpretation of the Prophecy), but takes on extreme importance when he turns out to be Snape. If Valky(?) is right and "Kill me like you killed him!" means "Kill me like you killed James" (rather than Dumbledore), Harry is now placing the blame for his parents' death squarely on Snape's shoulders. The eavesdropper role has been distorted out of all proportion, from insignificance to worse than the AKs that really killed his parents. Obviously Harry hates Snape (not because he's a "child abuser" but because he favors Slytherin, deducts points unfairly, and hates dear, dead Sirius). But I'm trying to point out how Harry's emotions shape his perception of the events at Godric's Hollow, how the blame for what happened keeps shifting away from Voldemort, and how Harry's hatred of Black in PoA parallels his hatred of Snape in HBP, with no such feelings attached to Wormtail. I see a parallel here between Black and Snape, and I'm trying to determine its significance. Can it be because Voldemort is insufficiently human to be an object of real hatred? Or do his parents' deaths become more real and painful to Harry when they're linked to people who knew them at Hogwarts rather than to the snake-faced monster for whom they had no human identity? But if that's so, why not hate Wormtail, too? Carol, who hopes that Harry will learn to see clearly (and stop hating) in Book 7 From hickengruendler at yahoo.de Tue Jan 24 21:49:28 2006 From: hickengruendler at yahoo.de (hickengruendler) Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2006 21:49:28 -0000 Subject: Assuming they survive... -- teacher at Hogwarts In-Reply-To: <20060124173243.42576.qmail@web52114.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146991 > > Amber: > > JKR has said the person who is going to be a teacher would be > someone that we won't expect. Has anyone thought of Luna? No > one would expect her to stay on and teach. Just IMO though. > Hickengruendler: And especially in 1999, 4 years before we first read about her, absolutely nobody would have thought about Luna. ;-) Which is one reason why I think JKR doesn't mean Luna. It would be really unfair to give the kids a chance to guess, if the characters is someone impossible to guess. The second reason is, that at least to my understanding of the word (though English is not my first language), Luna is not a "classmate". To me, Harry's classmates are Ron (who is ruled out by the interview), Hermione (who is IMO ruled out as well), Neville, Seamus, Dean, Parvati and Lavender. You might include the other students in Harry's year, particularly the Slytherins and Hufflepuffs, with whom he had some lessons together, but Hogwarts students in a totally different year than Harry are IMO not his classmates. Hickengruendler, who thinks she meant Neville From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Tue Jan 24 22:31:34 2006 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2006 22:31:34 -0000 Subject: Why Tom left Merope /Draco and Harry In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146992 > > >>Alla: > Betsy Hp: > Yes, but it was the kidnapping and raping that turned Tom off > Merope. And it was the spell or potion that turned Tom onto her. > Tom didn't leave Merope because she was a witch. He left her > because she'd used him so horribly. Alla: Yes, he left her because she used him, but she used him using " magical means", the means that only witch or wizard can use, so I don't think that it is too much to assume that besides specific reasons for leaving Merope , Tom had more general reasons. ONLY witch can prepare "love potion", muggle obviously cannot, so IMO Tom left her because she was a witch and because she used him as only witch can. > Betsy Hp: > Hmmm, I know Draco is often referred to as a bully, but I'm not sure > there's any instinces of Draco bullying in canon. He's cruel to > Neville a few times, but I don't recall him ever coming near the > type of bullying we see Dudley engaged in. Alla: Yes, we obviously differ on that one. To me what Draco and his goons do to Neville or attempt to do Neville in PS/SS IS the same level of what Dudley and his gang did to Harry. > > >>Alla: > > How do you know that? How do you know that Draco insults Hagrid > > because he wants to amuse Harry? > > > > Betsy Hp: > Because Draco calls Harry's attention to Hagrid and because Draco > likes to be amusing. And because, quite frankly, Hagrid is a rather > amusing character. Alla: Draco calls Harry's attention to Hagrid BEFORE he knows who Hagrid is, after that his words became very not amusing, to me anyway. > Betsy Hp: > When did Draco spit? I don't recall any spitting. Your quote > certainly doesn't have any spitting in it. Alla: Oh, I was trying to be metaphorical, unsuccesfully, obviously. Draco talks disgusting words. Sounds better? Betsy Hp: Per canon > Hagrid does get drunk and per canon Hagrid can take some rather > foolish actions (Norbert). I'm not sure why pointing that out means > that Draco is either prejudiced (against what exactly?) or > judgemental. Alla: Because Draco characterises the person whom he NEVER met as quite bad person. To me it is prejudice. > > >>Alla: > > That's the point, IMO. Because he did not know who Harry Potter > > was, Draco shows him his ugly inner self by insulting ALL > > muggleborn witches and wizards. > > > > Betsy Hp: So Draco's beliefs about Muggleborns > aren't because he's been raised to think a certain way and has never > had that sort of thinking challenged, but because deep inside Draco > is just a horrible, ugly, little boy. Alla: Erm... NO, Betsy. Draco's beliefs about Muggleborns are what MAKES him to be horrible, ugly person. That would be the correct summary of my position. Of course, Draco was raised to think a certain way, we ALL get our beliefs from somewhere. I am not saying that Draco cannot change his beliefs, but neither I am willing to EXCUSE his beliefs because he was raised that way. Draco is Lucius' son, but I want him to take responsibility for who he is, till then - YES he is that horrible person in my book. Betsy Hp: > Draco *does* display his prejudices. And Ron does not display his. > So Harry befriends Ron, and when Ron recoils from Hagrid because > he's a half-giant, and when Ron is repulsed by Lupin being a > werewolf, and when Ron thinks it's fitting that Filch is a squib, > Harry forgives him and gives Ron a chance to realize that Hagrid is > still Hagrid and Lupin is all right too. Alla: Ron at twelve years of age knows that the word "mudblood" is wrong and knows WHY it is wrong. Ron NEVER stops being Hagrid's friend, so I am afraid I cannot see how Ron comes even remotely close to Draco in the prejudice department. As to giving Ron chance after chance - well, Ron proves himself worthy of his chances. He knows when he is wrong and he learns from his mistakes, IMO. Betsy Hp: But Draco is such a lost > cause anyway, it's best that Harry have nothing to do with him. The > Sorting Hat is completely wrong, and Dumbledore is a fool. Alla: You said it, not me. :-) JMO, Alla From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Tue Jan 24 22:56:00 2006 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2006 22:56:00 -0000 Subject: Why Tom left Merope /Draco and Harry In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146993 Betsy Hp wrote: > Yes, but it was the kidnapping and raping that turned Tom off Merope. And it was the spell or potion that turned Tom onto her. Tom didn't leave Merope because she was a witch. He left her because she'd used him so horribly. Merope didn't rape Tom *because* she was a witch. Being a witch *enabled* her to rape him. If Tom had fallen in love with Merope all on his own he may well have stayed after the big reveal. But Tom didn't love Merope. He never loved Merope. And her treatment of him guaranteed he would never come to love her. Compare that to say, Seamus's parents where the big reveal was a surprise but not a horror. Carol responds: Maybe I'm just old-fashioned, but I have difficulty conceiving of the seduction of a man by a woman as rape. The sex wasn't forced. He had to have wanted it or it could not have happened. That's not to say that Merope is innocent. She did deceive him and make him think that he loved her and found her desirable. (We see the same thing happening to Ron with Romilda Vane in HBP, but fortunately Romilda only wanted Harry, for whom the potion was intended, to like her and maybe kiss her. There's an element of naivete in both cases.) I think you're right that Seamus's revelation to her husband that she was a witch was "a surprise but not a horror" because they were in love. (We don't hear anything about Seamus's father deserting the family; still, it would have been better if she had tole him *before* the marriage.) But rich, handsome, presumably well-educated Tom Riddle Sr. could never have loved Merope Gaunt even if she hadn't been a witch. She was abused, uneducated, poor, and ugly. Even combed and bathed and dressed in the nicest clothes she could find (or conjure), she was wall-eyed. She had no idea of proper decorum, no social status, nothing that could appeal to him in a wife. And by tricking him into marrying him, she prevented him from marrying his sweetheart, or some other suitable bride of his social class. Of course, Tom Sr. couldn't explain that he had literally been bewitched. He could only protest that he had been tricked. Evidently he couldn't even divorce her or get the marriage annulled. No divorce court would believe his story that he'd been given a love potion. So when Merope finally got the courage to appear to him without the love potion, perhaps to explain that she was a witch but certainly hoping that he would see that she loved him and love her in return, all he could see was an ugly, uneducated, poor, dirty, unsuitable wife, quite possibly mentally defective, and flee in horror at the trick she had played on him. There's something to pity in both cases, but my sympathies are with Merope, who loved a man she could never have and tried in the only way she knew to get him to love her. If she'd been an intelligent and educated witch like Hermione, her conduct would have been inexcusable. But IMO she was a victim of abuse and neglect who was never taught right from wrong (can you imagine lessons on morality from Marvolo Gaunt?) and never had a chance of meeting and falling in love with a suitable husband. I agree that Tom Sr. never loved Merope; he never *could* have loved her because, poor thing, she was so unloveable. But he could at least have hidden her away somewhere and provided for their unborn child once he recovered from the shock of having married and impregnated her. But he was rich, handsome, and arrogant (GoF chap. 1). His prospects (IMO) were ruined. He could not marry his intended bride (evidently he never learned of Merope's death), so he remained in his parents' house, no doubt resenting her to the end of his days. But he never gave a thought to her love or her suffering; never gave a thought to his unborn child, who would ultimately repay this rejection with murder. Carol, wondering what would have happened if Tom Sr. had sought out his newborn son and raised him as a wealthy Muggle rather than letting him grow up unacknowledged in an orphanage From rkdas at charter.net Tue Jan 24 23:18:31 2006 From: rkdas at charter.net (susanbones2003) Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2006 23:18:31 -0000 Subject: Why Tom left Merope /Draco and Harry In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146994 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "justcarol67" wrote: SNIPPED ALL! > > Carol, wondering what would have happened if Tom Sr. had sought out > his newborn son and raised him as a wealthy Muggle rather than letting > him grow up unacknowledged in an orphanage Carol, You touched on something either I don't understand, forgot or never connected. Did Tom Sr. even know about his child? I can't imagine a rich man of that time allowing a child to exist with his name (plenty of rich men fathered children anonymously, no doubt) without acknowledging said child. I will go back and read but I can't remember this point coming up. Jen D. > From agdisney at msn.com Tue Jan 24 23:28:00 2006 From: agdisney at msn.com (Andrea Grevera) Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2006 18:28:00 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Why Tom left Merope References: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146995 Carol, wondering what would have happened if Tom Sr. had sought out his newborn son and raised him as a wealthy Muggle rather than letting him grow up unacknowledged in an orphanage Andie: Quick question - Did Tom know that Merope was pregnant before he left her? Did Merope tell him? Pg 214 HBP US version: Tom Riddle reappeared at the manor house in Little Hangleton without his wife. The rumor flew around the neighborhood that he was talking of being 'hoodwinked' & 'taken in.' ...the villagers guessed that Merope had lied to Tom Riddle, pretending that she was going to have his baby, & that he had married her for this reason." "But she did have his baby." "But not until a year after they were married. Tom Riddle left her while she was still pregnant." We don't know if Merope ever told Riddle that she was pregnant. LV could have killed his father & grandparents without them knowing that he had ever been born. Before posting to any list, you MUST read the group's Admin File! http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/files/Admin_Files/HBF_Text__MUST_READ Please use accurate subject headings and snip unnecessary material from posts to which you're replying! Yahoo! Groups Links [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From agdisney at msn.com Tue Jan 24 23:33:27 2006 From: agdisney at msn.com (Andrea Grevera) Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2006 18:33:27 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Why Tom left Merope /Draco and Harry References: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146996 wrote: SNIPPED ALL! > > Carol, wondering what would have happened if Tom Sr. had sought out > his newborn son and raised him as a wealthy Muggle rather than letting > him grow up unacknowledged in an orphanage Carol, You touched on something either I don't understand, forgot or never connected. Did Tom Sr. even know about his child? I can't imagine a rich man of that time allowing a child to exist with his name (plenty of rich men fathered children anonymously, no doubt) without acknowledging said child. I will go back and read but I can't remember this point coming up. Jen D. Andie: Great minds must think alike - I just posted this same question. Quick question - Did Tom know that Merope was pregnant before he left her? Did Merope tell him? Pg 214 HBP US version: Tom Riddle reappeared at the manor house in Little Hangleton without his wife. The rumor flew around the neighborhood that he was talking of being 'hoodwinked' & 'taken in.' ...the villagers guessed that Merope had lied to Tom Riddle, pretending that she was going to have his baby, & that he had married her for this reason." "But she did have his baby." "But not until a year after they were married. Tom Riddle left her while she was still pregnant." We don't know if Merope ever told Riddle that she was pregnant. LV could have killed his father & grandparents without them knowing that he had ever been born. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From quick_silver71 at yahoo.ca Tue Jan 24 23:46:40 2006 From: quick_silver71 at yahoo.ca (quick_silver71) Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2006 23:46:40 -0000 Subject: Was the eavesdropper unimportant to Harry? WAS: Re: Snape again In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146997 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "justcarol67" wrote: (snip> > Obviously Harry hates Snape (not because he's a "child abuser" but > because he favors Slytherin, deducts points unfairly, and hates dear, > dead Sirius). But I'm trying to point out how Harry's emotions shape > his perception of the events at Godric's Hollow, how the blame for > what happened keeps shifting away from Voldemort, and how Harry's > hatred of Black in PoA parallels his hatred of Snape in HBP, with no > such feelings attached to Wormtail. I see a parallel here between > Black and Snape, and I'm trying to determine its significance. Can it > be because Voldemort is insufficiently human to be an object of real > hatred? Or do his parents' deaths become more real and painful to > Harry when they're linked to people who knew them at Hogwarts rather > than to the snake-faced monster for whom they had no human identity? > But if that's so, why not hate Wormtail, too? > > Carol, who hopes that Harry will learn to see clearly (and stop > hating) in Book 7 > Excellent post Carol...too bad I had to snip most of it. If I may add a little tiny something...the Shrieking Shack incident of PoA and it aftermath included several interesting scenes with Snape. To a certain extent the ending of PoA is maybe the only part of the novels where Snape is clearly wrong about something...and when Snape gets it wrong boy does he get's it wrong. (Now forgive me...it's been a while since I read PoA) Snape basically functions as the...villian...or perhaps misguided, dangerous fool, with a grudge...in a way that Peter simply does not. Snape threatens people, he screams and carries on, he refuses to listen or see the truth, etc. and in the end the Trio have to attack the man to shut him up. He then proceeds to question Dumbledore's judgement, in front of other people, and generally make an a** of himself ending when he causes Lupin to lose his job. Harry himself seems to note that Snape's dislike of increases after the events of PoA. So part of the reason that Harry doesn't sit around hating Peter is because he was too busy that night dealing with Snape. Quick_Silver From nrenka at yahoo.com Wed Jan 25 00:12:25 2006 From: nrenka at yahoo.com (nrenka) Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2006 00:12:25 -0000 Subject: Was the eavesdropper unimportant to Harry? WAS: Re: Snape again In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146998 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "justcarol67" wrote: > Or do his parents' deaths become more real and painful to Harry when > they're linked to people who knew them at Hogwarts rather than to the > snake-faced monster for whom they had no human identity? But if that's > so, why not hate Wormtail, too? Because Wormtail's not *there*. Because to everyone who Harry knows and cares about, Wormtail is *known to be guilty* and will be dealt with if he's caught. Peter is off-stage and servile and chained. But from Harry's POV, Snape is now known to bear responsibility that Harry had never known that Snape had, but there's been no revelation to Harry that a significant price has been paid for it. Harry is unconvinced by Dumbledore's explanation of Snape's remorse over the Potters, but that's no shock because at least half the list is sure that can't be it either. For Dumbledore, there's something else there--but Harry doesn't know what, so it might as well not exist. Remorse that someone doesn't show to an affected person is generally not considered remorse, after all. -Nora has some thoughts about statements of time regarding Snape's turning back to the white hats, but will look up citations and post later From AllieS426 at aol.com Wed Jan 25 00:22:06 2006 From: AllieS426 at aol.com (allies426) Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2006 00:22:06 -0000 Subject: Assuming they survive... In-Reply-To: <20060124165155.77894.qmail@web33301.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 146999 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, ActorLady wrote: > > > Hermione, now her I see becoming MOM. She's just so > very smart. Allie: Lots of people have mentioned this, but I just don't think Hermione's political career is starting off well. She's trying to liberate a magical population that doesn't want it (and in fact she's alienated all of the house elves but Dobby). Even Hagrid, the champion of all magical creatures, wouldn't support her. She dropped SPEW without so much as a mention of it in HP 6. Who knows, maybe she'll remember it in the next book; I do think the house elves will be important. But I might add that political careers and intelligence do not always go hand in hand... From stevejjen at earthlink.net Wed Jan 25 00:32:34 2006 From: stevejjen at earthlink.net (Jen Reese) Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2006 00:32:34 -0000 Subject: Was the eavesdropper unimportant to Harry? WAS: Re: Snape again In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147001 Carol: > Dumbledore tells Harry that LV's information about the Prophecy was > incomplete because "the eavesdropper was detected only a short way > into the prophecy and thrown from the building." > > Instead of saying, "What eavesdropper? What are you talking about?" > Harry only says, "So he only heard . . . ?" and DD finishes the > thought: "He heard only the first part . . . . Consequently, he > could not warn his master that to attack you would be to risk > transferring powers to you" (OoP Am. ed. 843). The conversation > then shifts back to Voldemort and the eavesdropper is not brought > up again. DD, of course, doesn't want to call attention to him, > but *Harry* clearly doesn't regard him as important at this point. Jen: My guess is Harry had simply taken in too much information to pursue the eavsdropper at that point. His focus is on this earth- shattering development(to Harry anyway, if not the readers) of the prophecy, Voldemort's choice and the aftermath. A better case is made by the fact Harry never pursues this information with Dumbledore until he hears Trelawney mention it. Without being given specific canon, it does seem he forgot about it until the moment he hears Snape was the eavesdropper. Now this is conjecture, but I do think if Harry had learned the eavedropper was *anyone* he knew he would have felt shock. He jumps all over Mundungus earlier in the book for stealing from Sirius, presumably because Harry views it as an insult to Sirius' memory, so I think anyone who had even an indirect part in betraying his parents would have caused a reaction. But since it's Snape, I have to agree with Dorsai that the rage Harry feels includes Dumbledore as well. Dumbledore has always protected Snape from the outside world almost as much as he protects Harry, and there seems to be a sibling rivalry aspect to their antipathy--who does Dumbledore care about the most? That seemed like the core of Harry's anger to me when he confronted Dumbledore, that the eavesdropper was the hated Snape but also the prodigal bother, undeserving of Dumbledore's trust and protection. Carol: > Yes, of course, there's a personal element. Harry *wants* to hate > Snape, *wants* him to be guilty of every possible crime. But he > also violently hated Sirius Black when he thought him guilty of > betraying and therefore "killing" his parents. Why hate Black and > not Pettigrew for the exact same crimes when both PP and SB were > his father's friends? (I hold with the "vermin" theory myself. > Interesting that Snape holds the same view.) Jen: I think the initial strong reaction against Sirius had more to do with him being an abstraction to Harry until the Shrieking Shack. He was simply a madman who was best man for James and then betrayed his parents. No personal connection to Harry except one photo. Actually meeting Sirus, hearing the story, meeting Peter--all those elements cast a different light both on Sirius and the 'betrayer'. I think Snape's greatest sin is that he hated James and he can never overcome that in Harry's eyes, just as Harry can never overcome being James' son. In the abstract Harry can hate the person who betrayed his parents but when actually facing his father's old friends and learning they cared about each other once, the feelings change. There's no room for Snape in either generation, he's the hated outsider to both the Marauders and the Trio. Carol: > But I'm trying to point out how Harry's emotions shape > his perception of the events at Godric's Hollow, how the blame for > what happened keeps shifting away from Voldemort, and how Harry's > hatred of Black in PoA parallels his hatred of Snape in HBP, with > no such feelings attached to Wormtail. I see a parallel here > between Black and Snape, and I'm trying to determine its > significance. Can it be because Voldemort is insufficiently human > to be an object of real hatred? Or do his parents' deaths become > more real and painful to Harry when they're linked to people who > knew them at Hogwarts rather than to the snake-faced monster for > whom they had no human identity? Jen: I see this as a pretty classic psychological mechanism. Voldemort is overwhelming in his power and domination and Harry doesn't see how it's possible to defeat him, even after Dumbledore attempts to show him where the cracks are. Snape *can* be defeated as Harry saw in POA and the Pensieve scene. He's weak, sometimes in the same places Harry is weak--letting emotions get the better of him, getting into messes he can't get out of on his own, being picked on. So I think both your statements above are accurate, it's a combination of both Voldemort not really being human (i.e. not weak yet) and Harry filtering people in or out based on whether they cared about his parents. Finding out Lily cared about Snape in some shape or form would really rock Harry's world in that respect, probably force a re- evaluation. That idea galls me though, she would be too good to be true: Champion of underdogs, turning James into a respectable husband and father, the sacrificial mother, and cheeky to boot? Bleh. Jen From AllieS426 at aol.com Wed Jan 25 00:33:39 2006 From: AllieS426 at aol.com (allies426) Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2006 00:33:39 -0000 Subject: Assuming they survive...-ginger In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147002 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "india jones" wrote: > Nikki: > JKR has been going through pregnancy while writing some of the books, > I know that ginger tea is a cure for morning sickness, maybe that's > why she writes about it becausew it helped her through some bad > mornings. > Allie: Funny, I never noticed so many references to ginger before that post (see upthread). Are they actually in the books? Creative fanfic, I think. I did notice that Crookshanks is always described as a ginger cat and that Mundungus is ALSO described as having ginger hair. (But no, I don't think Mundungus is an Animagus. Sometimes a ginger cat is just a kneazle.) From willsonkmom at msn.com Wed Jan 25 02:09:10 2006 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2006 02:09:10 -0000 Subject: Assuming they survive... -- teacher at Hogwarts In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147003 > Hickengruendler: > > And especially in 1999, 4 years before we first read about her, > absolutely nobody would have thought about Luna. ;-) Which is one > reason why I think JKR doesn't mean Luna. It would be really unfair > to give the kids a chance to guess, if the characters is someone > impossible to guess. Potioncat: Agreed. It would be someone we'd met at that time. Hickengruendler: The second reason is, that at least to my > understanding of the word (though English is not my first language), > Luna is not a "classmate". To me, Harry's classmates are Ron (who is > ruled out by the interview), Hermione (who is IMO ruled out as well), > Neville, Seamus, Dean, Parvati and Lavender. You might include the > other students in Harry's year, particularly the Slytherins and > Hufflepuffs, with whom he had some lessons together, but Hogwarts > students in a totally different year than Harry are IMO not his > classmates. Potioncat: I've thought for a long time this was a hard one...although JKR probably wasn't trying to be overly tricky. Classmate could just mean those students who actually had classes with you. Or it could mean any of the students in the same year as you. Or it could mean any student who was at school about the same time as you. It depends a lot on context, and how precise the speaker is. I think Neville is a strong choice, but I'm still voting for Percy. It was suggested upthread that Neville might become a Healer. But Neville wasn't able to take the courses required for Healer. So I think that's out. My prediction is that Ron becomes a Healer. He was reading about it, complained at the requirements, but is taking those same courses for Auror. From juli17 at aol.com Wed Jan 25 02:16:14 2006 From: juli17 at aol.com (juli17 at aol.com) Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2006 21:16:14 EST Subject: Assuming they survive... -- teacher at Hogwarts Message-ID: <27b.3b85054.3108396e@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 147004 Pippin: > Assuming Harry keeps his powers, IMO Ron and Harry will > become Aurors, and Hermione will be a political activist, > eventually becoming the first Muggle-born Minister of Magic. > I think Neville will be the Hogwarts teacher. Amber: JKR has said the person who is going to be a teacher would be someone that we won't expect. Has anyone thought of Luna? No one would expect her to stay on and teach. Just IMO though. Julie: My official guess is that Draco will be the student who eventually teaches at Hogwarts. He'll teach Potions, in a nod to his previous Potions professor and head of house, Snape, who will of course die by Voldemort's hand after having been revealed DDM (but not before he manages to convert Draco to the Order's side). Draco will be as superior acting and snarky a professor as Snape, demanding much of his students, particularly those of his house, Slytherin. But he will benefit from Snape's tutelage and example, thus avoiding the anger- driven bad choices that so marred Snape's life. You heard it here first :-) Julie [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From willsonkmom at msn.com Wed Jan 25 02:15:27 2006 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2006 02:15:27 -0000 Subject: Assuming they survive...Snape In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147005 "whtwitch91" > > I'm one of the "Snape is DDM" people and I believe he will survive > the last book, but will be so notorious he will have to flee the > country and eventually arrive in New Jersey where he will be > employeed in one of the many chemical labs. In North Jersey his > abrasive personality will be so unremarkable that he will fit right > in. > > Sue, a Jersey girl Potioncat: Beleive it or not, New Jersey has come up before as a location for Snape: to go to, to be from, to vacation at. Not sure why NJ of all places. Hmmm...maybe that chimney at Spinner's End was really the smokestack at the Dow Chemical Plant on the Delaware River! Potioncat, NJ girl (by marriage) From kchuplis at alltel.net Wed Jan 25 02:28:21 2006 From: kchuplis at alltel.net (Karen) Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2006 20:28:21 -0600 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Assuming they survive...-ginger In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <40B2AAFC-8D4A-11DA-8BEE-000393B04DDE@alltel.net> No: HPFGUIDX 147006 On Tuesday, January 24, 2006, at 06:23 PM, allies426 wrote: > > Funny, I never noticed so many references to ginger before that post > (see upthread).? Creative fanfic, I think.? I did notice that > Crookshanks is always described as a ginger cat and that Mundungus is > ALSO described as having ginger hair. > > > kchuplis: Yeah, that's what I was thinking of...all the ginger hair. I saw an interview with the actors that play the twins and they said none of their friends believed they landed the roles until they turned up at school "with ginger hair". RE: Harry - I know he loves quidditch, but somehow I can't see him dedicating his life to it no matter how sick he is of dark wizards. From horridporrid03 at yahoo.com Wed Jan 25 02:40:20 2006 From: horridporrid03 at yahoo.com (horridporrid03) Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2006 02:40:20 -0000 Subject: Why Tom left Merope In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147007 > >>Betsy Hp: > > Yes, but it was the kidnapping and raping that turned Tom off > > Merope. > > > >>Carol: > Maybe I'm just old-fashioned, but I have difficulty conceiving of > the seduction of a man by a woman as rape. The sex wasn't forced. > He had to have wanted it or it could not have happened. > Betsy Hp: I've been involved in discussions about whether a woman can rape a man, if his necessary responses negates any sort of force that may have been involved. But this isn't that sort of discussion. Dumbledore stated that Merope either used Imperius or a love potion. Which means, that Tom has as much choice in this matter as the young boy who tried to kill his grandparents in HBP, or Rosemerta had in assisting Draco. It's *very* important, IMO, that Dumbledore equated a love potion with the Imperius curse. They both take away any sort of ability to choose. So Tom could have had all sorts of sex with Merope without wanting it at all. The truly horrifying thing is that while under the influence Tom would have been *begging* for it, despite his true wishes. (No wonder Merope got the wrong idea about Tom's real feelings.) I'm just as horrified by what Romilda Vane tried to do to Harry as I was by hearing what Merope put Tom Riddle through. When Harry was under the influence of the love potion Romilda could have made him do whatever she wanted him to. That she was only thirteen suggests that sex probably wouldn't have happened (though I've known some very precocious thirteen year olds) but she may well have molested Harry. How different would that have been from say, Krum, going a bit further than Hermoine was comfortable with? *Especially* since Harry would be completely unable to express any sort of protest, even the faint kind. Romilda wouldn't have had any idea if Harry was uncomfortable with anything she suggested. [Bit of an aside, but I wonder if Harry can fight off a love potion as he can an Imperius? It wouldn't surprise me if he could. Of course, Muggle Tom wouldn't have had a chance.] > >>Carol: > > There's something to pity in both cases, but my sympathies are with > Merope, who loved a man she could never have and tried in the only > way she knew to get him to love her. If she'd been an intelligent > and educated witch like Hermione, her conduct would have been > inexcusable. Betsy Hp: I think you're missing the power structure here. Merope had *all* the power. Sure, she's ugly and poor and Tom is handsome and rich. But Merope had the power to enslave Tom; a power Tom did not share and could not defend against. Merope was powerless *within her family*, but she was a witch attacking a Muggle. And we've seen what happens whenever a wizard or witch attacks a Muggle. Merope wanted Tom and she got him. Tom's desires were, as per usual in these power struggles, irrelevent. > >>Carol: > But IMO she was a victim of abuse and neglect who was never taught > right from wrong (can you imagine lessons on morality from Marvolo > Gaunt?) and never had a chance of meeting and falling in love with > a suitable husband. Betsy Hp: Right, so I do feel a bit of sympathy for her. But that doesn't change the fact that she took away Tom's freedom of choice and took him as her own. She abused Tom in the way she had been abused (possibly literally). So the bulk of my sympathy is with Tom, who became a victim because he wasn't leery enough of the freaks in the forest. Dudley could have told him, never, ever, trust a wizard (or a witch), *especially* ones baring food or drink. > >>Carol: > I agree that Tom Sr. never loved Merope; he never *could* have > loved her because, poor thing, she was so unloveable. But he could > at least have hidden her away somewhere and provided for their > unborn child once he recovered from the shock of having married > and impregnated her. But he was rich, handsome, and arrogant (GoF > chap. 1). Betsy Hp: Not arrogant enough, unfortunately. He had some sympathy towards Merope (so she must have been somewhat loveable) and she used it to take him as her pet. And, having never had any toys before, she broke him. Then, in an act of utter selfishness, she couldn't even be bothered to try and stick around for her son. Huh. Maybe I'm not all that sympathetic after all. > >>Carol, wondering what would have happened if Tom Sr. had sought > out his newborn son and raised him as a wealthy Muggle rather than > letting him grow up unacknowledged in an orphanage Betsy Hp: I wonder, would Tom have been mentally fit to raise a child? He never left his home again once he'd escaped from Merope. He didn't go Europe or anything. Just huddled at home until the son he may not have even realized he had came and killed him. Perhaps his fear of Merope would have translated to his son and Tom, Jr. may have ended up ruling the roost. Especially with his early grasp of magic. Betsy Hp From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Wed Jan 25 02:44:02 2006 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2006 02:44:02 -0000 Subject: Why Tom left Merope /Draco and Harry In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147008 Carol, wondering what would have happened if Tom Sr. had sought out > > his newborn son and raised him as a wealthy Muggle rather than > letting > > him grow up unacknowledged in an orphanage > Jen D: > You touched on something either I don't understand, forgot or never connected. Did Tom Sr. even know about his child? I can't imagine a rich man of that time allowing a child to exist with his name (plenty of rich men fathered children anonymously, no doubt) without acknowledging said child. I will go back and read but I can't remember this point coming up. > > Andie: > Quick question - Did Tom know that Merope was pregnant before he left her? > Did Merope tell him? > We don't know if Merope ever told Riddle that she was pregnant. LV could have killed his father & grandparents without them knowing that he had ever been born. Carol responds: I may be skating on thin ice here, but I doubt very much that Merope would have told Tom Sr. about the love potion without also telling him about their child, hoping that the pregnancy would keep them together, begging the man she so desperately loved not to desert their unborn baby even if he deserted her. (Unless she was even more mentally deficient than she seems, she would surely have waited until she was visibly pregnant to tell him, hoping that common decency would bind him to his child.) Also, she gave the baby his father's name, evidently telling the people at the orphanage that he was named after his father and grandfather. Otherwise, how could Diary!Tom have known this fact, and how could he have found his father to murder him? Quite possibly, the authorities looked for Tom Sr., too, when the baby was born. After all, it would be better in most people's minds for a baby to be brought up by relatives, especially rich ones, than placed in an orphanage. And knowing that his father had a chance to raise him but refused it would certainly explain the intensity of Tom Jr.'s hatred, not only of his father but of Muggles in general. Diary!Tom says in CoS that his father was "a foul, common Muggle who abandoned me even before I was born, just because he found out his wife was a witch" (Am. ed. 314). It's possible, of course, that Tom is wrong (for example, he apparently doesn't know about the love potion or how pathetically ugly and ignorant his mother was), but I don't think that JKR would use him as the explicator of the backstory here (as she so often uses Dumbledore) unless what he was saying was essentially true. I also think, given TR/Voldemort's tendency to explain his motives to Harry and the Death Eaters in both CoS and GoF, that he would quite likely have first petrified his father and grandparents (Petrificus Totalus), forcing them to hear who he was and what he intended to do to them, then Crucio'd them, and finally murdered them one by one, unfreezing them just long enough to allow them to assume that terrified expression as he hit them with the AKs. (If, as I speculated in one of my long-lost posts, the poisoned memory in the cave potion is that of Tom Sr. being Crucio'd and begging his son not to torture or kill his parents, Tom Sr. knew that he had "done wrong," that it was indeed his fault that his son had not been acknowledged and raised by his family.) Carol, happy to see her sign-offs receivng responses even when the posts themselves don't From tonks_op at yahoo.com Wed Jan 25 02:51:22 2006 From: tonks_op at yahoo.com (Tonks) Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2006 02:51:22 -0000 Subject: Snape and DD Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147009 Here is an interesting idea. I wonder if Snape is related to DD in someway. JKR has said that she told us nothing about DD's family for a reason and that if we explored his family line we might find something of interest. Maybe Snape is DD great, great grandson or something. Maybe Aberforth will tell us. This would put a new light on a lot of things. What does everyone think? Tonks_op From fuzz876i at yahoo.com Tue Jan 24 23:20:24 2006 From: fuzz876i at yahoo.com (fuzz876i) Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2006 23:20:24 -0000 Subject: Why Tom left Merope /Draco and Harry In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147010 > > Betsy Hp: > > Yes, but it was the kidnapping and raping that turned Tom off > > Merope. And it was the spell or potion that turned Tom onto her. > > Tom didn't leave Merope because she was a witch. He left her > > because she'd used him so horribly. > Betsy Hp: > > Draco *does* display his prejudices. And Ron does not display > his. > > So Harry befriends Ron, and when Ron recoils from Hagrid because > > he's a half-giant, and when Ron is repulsed by Lupin being a > > werewolf, and when Ron thinks it's fitting that Filch is a squib, > > Harry forgives him and gives Ron a chance to realize that Hagrid is > > still Hagrid and Lupin is all right too. > > Alla: > > Ron at twelve years of age knows that the word "mudblood" is wrong > and knows WHY it is wrong. Ron NEVER stops being Hagrid's friend, so > I am afraid I cannot see how Ron comes even remotely close to Draco > in the prejudice department. Fuzz876i: Are you all forgetting that it was not Ron or Harry that called Hermione a "mudblood" that was Malfoy. Draco thought he was better than everyone because of his family ties and this to him gave him the frame of mind that he could say and do anything without reprocussion to his actions. This being said these are true qualities of a bully. He used who his father knew to try and get Hagrid fired in PoA. His family and who they associated with led Malfoy to believe he was better than anyone else. We also find this with Merope's family in that they intermarried so many times that the family was starting to go crazy. She used either a love potion or some incantation to dupe Tom Riddle Sr into marrying her. By doing this she insured that her children would not face the insanities of her family. As far as I am concerned it was not rape. She quit using magic because she loved him but he obviously never loved her and was not ever to give the affection the chance because she controled his mind but not his body. fuzz876i From quick_silver71 at yahoo.ca Wed Jan 25 04:31:09 2006 From: quick_silver71 at yahoo.ca (quick_silver71) Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2006 04:31:09 -0000 Subject: Do any list members think Dumbledore might have asked Snape to kill him? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147011 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Steve" wrote: > bboyminn: > > Despite how many times this has been discussed, I doubt that it can > every be resolved until we have the last book. Even then, it may not > be completely resolved. > > Personally, I resist all speculation that Dumbledore and Snape sat > down and conspired for Snape to kill Dumbledore. That is too far > fetched and most unlikely. However, I don't have a problem with > Dumbledore impressing on Snape that Harry's life was of vital > important, and that Harry's life was more valuable than even his own > (Dumbledore's that is). > > Sorry, but that is far too unlikely a plan for me or Snape to ever > swallow, or for Dumbledore to ever conceive. > > However, in that final moment at the top of the tower, I can see > Dumbledore saying "...Severus ...please ...you understand the > situation. You know there is only one 'best' way out. Do what you know > you must do to salvage this situation and protect the innocent > (meaning Harry and Draco). Do what you know will produce the best > possible outcome in the struggle against Voldemort." > > I assume there was a degree of Legilimency involved, but I think the > bulk of it stems from Dumbledore's earlier emphasis that Harry's well > being must be protected AT ALL COSTS, and the cost in that terrible > moment was Dumbledore's life. > > Beside, between the Cave Potion and the Dead Hand Curse, I think > Dumbledore was fading fast. I think his time on this earth was already > limited, so his death didn't represent the loss of a full rich life > ahead. It represented the loss of the life of a person who had already > lived a long, full, rich life that was greatly rewarding and very > satisfying. Dumbledore knew he had lived his life and done his share > to make a better world, and while he did not welcome death, he also > did not fear it. > Further, in his own nasty way, Snape protected Harry on the way out. > He only used defensive curses against Harry, and he stopped the other > DE's from attacking Harry. Yes, Dumbledore is dead, BUT ONLY > Dumbledore is dead. It could have been much worse if Dumbledore had > chosen to fight, or had forced Snape to turn against the DE's in that > moment. I think regardless of Snape's choice, Dumbledore was certain > to die. > Good points and I mostly agree with them. However doesn't the scenario that you present really eliminate the possibility of Dumbledore and Snape having any long term goals with regards to Dumbledore's sacrifice? The reason that I say this is because the idea of Dumbledore having some sort of long range plan has never really seemed possible to me based on: the unpredictably nature of the Tower sequence and events leading up to it, the fact that Voldemort would be working in ways to either counter the plan or outside of the plan, and the fact that the longer Dumbledore is dead the less accurate his ability to influence events directly and indirectly will become. So I've has trouble seeing how Dumbledore could have possibly thought of every move that Voldemort could make. The other thing that's bothered me is the fact that Snape shouts out dueling tips to Harry as he and Harry. The more that I think about that scene the more uncontrolled it seems. I don't want to say that Snape was panicking but playing it by ear maybe? I wonder if maybe Snape was so emotional at the end of HBP because he really doesn't know what to do next? Now I'm going to disagree with you about the killing of Dumbledore being about saving Harry the Tower scene doesn't really seem to be about Harry IMO. Dumbledore had plenty of time on the Tower to send Harry to either safety (they still had brooms) or to send Harry through the school to wait for DE's at the bottom of the Tower (in hindsight that makes the most tactical sense IMO with Harry waiting at the bottom it's possible not a single DE except maybe Snape would have escaped). Instead Dumbledore keeps Harry on the Tower under the cloak to witness what occurs with Draco, the DE's, and Snape. Not so much for Harry's safety but so that Harry can see what happens because Harry needs to know. Harry needs to know because of who Harry is and what Harry must do. The scene on the Tower, IMO, sometimes comes across as Dumbledore's last lesson to pass on to Harry, the last thing that Dumbledore is going to teach to Harry. Much like Snape's retreat across Hogwart's and his shouting instructions to Harry is likely going to be Snape's last lesson for Harry the last time Snape is the master and Harry the student. Quick_Silver From nkafkafi at yahoo.com Wed Jan 25 04:33:29 2006 From: nkafkafi at yahoo.com (nkafkafi) Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2006 04:33:29 -0000 Subject: ESE!Lupin condensed and Lupin and Sirius replies In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147012 > Pippin: > JKR points up Snape's suspicions about Lupin: > "So that's why Snape doesn't like you," said Harry slowly, "because > he thought you were in on the joke?" > "That's right," sneered a cold voice from the wall behind Lupin. > PoA ch 18 > Neri: It's *Harry* here who refers to Lupin specifically, and he says Lupin was "in on the joke", suggesting one out of several partners rather than an instigator, which Snape confirms. > Pippin: > I don't recall any canon that Snape suspects Pettigrew is > involved so I don't see how we know that Snape blamed the > prank on all the marauders. > Neri: PoA ,Ch. 14, p. 285 (Scholastic): "Your saintly father and his friends played a highly amusing joke on me that would have resulted in my death " I understand "his friends" to be the other Marauders, which is probably what Harry understood too, since he says to Lupin "he thought you were *in* on the joke". But this only points at Lupin because Harry happens to be talking to Lupin at that moment, and he is talking to Lupin because Lupin is the only living Marauder that Harry had the chance (at that point in the story) to see Snape showing hatred to. > Pippin: > You're welcome to think the ESE!Lupin clues inadequate and > overly reliant on reader speculation, but they're perfectly in line > with the sorts of clues JKR has offered for other > mysteries. > > What clues do we have for Barty Crouch Jr? > The only clue that Barty has the same name as his father is that > Tom Riddle has the same name as *his* father. Neri: We have a clue that the Map says "Bartemius Crouch" was in Snape's office. There's a lot of discussion between the trio and Sirius about why would Crouch be in Snape's office when he's not even supposed to be at Hogwarts, which makes it an "official" mystery. At this point, if we realize that the Map only gives us the *name*, not the absolute identity, we would realize that it could be another person by the same name. And who such a person can be? The son of Bartemius Crouch, who is extensively discussed in that very same talk with Sirius but his name is never mentioned. It's a very devious clue, which makes it so good. But AFAIK there isn't in the books any similar clue suggesting "Wormtail" might be someone other than Pettigrew, certainly not something that is highlighted as an official mystery. > Pippin: > The only clue > that Barty's death has been faked is that Peter Pettigrew faked > *his* death. > The only clue that he escaped from Azkaban is > that Sirius managed it. Neri: Also that the son and his mother both died shortly after she visited him in Azkaban, an event that is also described by Sirius in that very same talk. > Pippin: > The only clue that he's using polyjuice potion > to hide his identity is Snape's reference to missing boomslang > skin, but there's no way to tell that Snape is referring to a > recent burglary, not the one that took place two years before. Neri: There are several indications that Snape is referring to a recent burglary: he mentions boomslang skin together with the gillyweed, which we know to be recent. Before that, in the "Egg and The Eye" chapter (p. 471 Scholastic) he says that someone has been stealing from his office, and he adds "Potion ingredient have gone missing from my private store cupboard no doubt students attempting illicit mixtures". Gillyweed was never mentioned as an ingredient of a potion, certainly not an "illicit" potion, but boomslang skin was. And again, all this is highlighted as an official mystery because we know that it was "Bartemius Crouch" who broke into Snape's office. > Pippin: > There's no hint that Fake!Moody's flask contains a potion, no > cabbage-y smell or anything like that. > Neri: But we were told in CoS that polyjuice potion works for only one hour. > Pippin: > None of this would be enough to implicate Fake!Moody by itself. Neri: The combination of them would certainly point to him. Or at the very least, it would suggest that Barty Coruch's son could be at Hogwarts stealing potion ingredients from Snape's office, and Fake!Moody would become the prime suspect. But the most important point here is that the reader, even if he/she hasn't solved yet the Fake!Moody mystery, is very aware that there's something fishy going on. There are all kinds of unexplained occurrences, suspects and clues around. Something is definitely afoot. At that point, if a perceptive reader suggests a theory that Moody could be Barty Crouch's son on polyjuice, even if the details aren't clear yet, the theory would already answer several official mysteries, like who is Voldemort's agent at Hogwarts (who was mentioned in the first chapter), who put Harry's name in the goblet, what family secret is Winky covering on and why was "Bartemius Crouch" stealing potion ingredients from Snape's office. Later on in the story it would also explain the disappearance of Crouch Sr. in the forest. In comparison, ESE!Lupin doesn't solve any official mysteries. There is practically no need for it except that it would be bangy. > Pippin: > You have to look at the way he acts for that. The way Lupin acts > ought to be enough to draw suspicion on him. He's willing to > kill in cold blood. > > I've heard any number of excuses for it -- he was temporarily > unhinged by Pettigrew's reappearance, he was following some > old WW tradition of revenge killings, he'd > lost faith in wizarding justice, he was blindly obedient to > Sirius. All purely speculative, contra-canonical and highly > convoluted, IMO, when all the time there's a simple but heartbreaking > answer: he's a killer. > > Not a brutal, psychotic or indiscriminate killer, but one who > chose to kill when he had to choose between what > was right and what was easy. > Neri: Here is my own explanation for Lupin's behavior. I think that JKR is slightly guilty of plot-device-ness here (what is the proper literary term?). She needs Pettigrew to leave the Shack with a Life Debt to Harry. So Pettigrew must have died if not for Harry, and Harry alone is allowed to save him. Well, Sirius definitely would kill Pettigrew, but Lupin must go along with him. Otherwise Pettigrew would have owed his Debt to Lupin. How do we know that this is indeed what was going on in JKR's head? The obvious indication is Hermione's behavior. Hermione is the most politically correct character in the series, the very voice of What's Right, and during most of the Shrieking Shack night she just can't shut up. Everyone gets a piece of her mind - Lupin, Sirius, Snape, Dumbledore, Fudge - she's not afraid of any of them. But when a field execution is going to take place right in front of her, Hermione shuts up. When the convict begs her for mercy she merely "backs away against the wall looking horrified" and when Sirius and Lupin raise their wands to kill, she "covers her face with her hands and turns against the wall". She's choosing what's easy over what's right. So is Ron. Now, Hermione and Ron are only kids, so they can merely watch, but Lupin is the grownup and the teacher in the scene, so he must take an active part, or it wouldn't be clear that Pettigrew indeed faced certain death and that only Harry saved him. So Sirius asks Lupin to kill Pettigrew together and Lupin agrees. This would also make it slightly more like an execution and less like a revenge murder, and Sirius would share the blame. Now, how would Lupin go about this execution and still be in character? He wouldn't act emotional like Sirius, even if he's torn by emotions from inside, and he wouldn't pretend to be noble either. He's not proud of what he's doing, it's just a necessity imposed by the ruthless author. He'd be very composed and matter-of-fact about it. But when he says goodbye to Peter he's talking "quietly", not "coldly" or "indifferently". When Lupin is talking "quietly" it means he feels deeply. I must say, right after we've witnessed not only Sirius' revenge frenzy, but also Snape taunting the people he's turning in to the dementors, Lupin's killing style seems almost refreshing. > Pippin: > I fail to see why the first six books of the series > should be concerned with spies, traitors and > mysteries, but not the last. You don't have to *read* them for > the mystery plots, but they're definitely there. How else > are we to explain JKR's constant references to clues and > red herrings when she discusses her work? > Neri: Yes, but there's a difference between JKR's style of mystery a standard whodunit. In the standard whodunit we are practically guaranteed that by the end of the book an "unexpected" murderer will be revealed. In JKR's case the clues and red herrings can be about the location of a Horcrux, or about the motives of a character, or about what exactly happened one fateful night 16 years ago. > Pippin: > You are welcome to think it's no mystery and Snape is > the traitor, but if it isn't, why should JKR have refused to say > that he's evil? What's the point? Neri: Maybe because the real mystery is about Snape's motives and future choices rather than about whether he killed Dumbledore or not. A "who killed Dumbledore" would be a standard whodunit, but is JKR writing a standard whodunit? You might want to consider again Dumbledore's tip to the reader in CoS: the real question isn't *who*, but *how*. > Pippin: > I think that if the body of the deceased has fresh > blood on it a considerable interval of time after it's supposed > to have died of a curse that doesn't leave any trace -- > well, if that's not meant to be a clue, then JKR *is* a > terrible mystery writer. > Neri: If that's not meant to be a clue, then JKR is perhaps a terrible mystery writer in Agatha Christy's standards. But is she writing a Christy style mystery? Neri From luckdragon64 at yahoo.ca Wed Jan 25 03:24:17 2006 From: luckdragon64 at yahoo.ca (Bee Chase) Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2006 22:24:17 -0500 (EST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Snape and DD In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20060125032417.39682.qmail@web53309.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 147013 Tonks wrote: Here is an interesting idea. I wonder if Snape is related to DD in someway. JKR has said that she told us nothing about DD's family for a reason and that if we explored his family line we might find something of interest. Maybe Snape is DD great, great grandson or something. Maybe Aberforth will tell us. This would put a new light on a lot of things. What does everyone think? Tonks_op Luckdragon: Canon tells us that all pureblood wizarding families are inter-related, so there must be a relationship of some kind. It is possible they are related, but I think the ancestry Jo was referring to was possibly Godric Gryffindor. There sure isn't a family resemblance to go by if they are related. --------------------------------- Find your next car at Yahoo! Canada Autos [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From zgirnius at yahoo.com Wed Jan 25 05:19:17 2006 From: zgirnius at yahoo.com (zgirnius) Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2006 05:19:17 -0000 Subject: Why DADA for Snape? (WAS Re: Do any list members think...) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147014 quick_silver: > Good points and I mostly agree with them. However doesn't the > scenario that you present really eliminate the possibility of > Dumbledore and Snape having any long term goals with regards to > Dumbledore's sacrifice? zgirnius: Well, I have a theory about that. I think they might have had long term plans without planning, necessarily, to kill Dumbledore. I have been thinking again about why Dumbledore gave the DADA post to Snape. Suggestions I remember reading include: 1) Dumbledore knew he was dying and it was a kind of 'thank you' for Snape; 2) Dumbledore needed to get Slughorn, (for his memory, and/or so Harry could take NEWT Potions) and Slughorn has to teach Potions; 3) Dumbledore could find noone else; 4) There was a plan to kill Dumbledore, Snape would be leaving by the end of the year anyway; 5) It wouldn't really cause a problem, DD would just move him back to Potions the following year. I don't really like any of these, alone or in combination, anymore. 1) What kind of 'thank you' is a cursed position? 2) There are two Divination Profs. Why not Potions? 3) Why not ask the Ministry? 4) Steve and quick_silver said it well. 5) I don't think so. Voldemort made the curse, and it has had some bad effects... So anyway, I thought to myself, what could they hope to accomplish by putting Snape in DADA? And it came to me...the one outcome they can be *sure* of from this move is that Snape will be leaving Hogwarts by the end of the year. So I decided that must be what DD intended all along. The advantage of having Snape leave is that it takes him back to Voldemort. Yes, he's Dumbledore's spy among the Death Eaters, but how much can he do in that role in he is at Hogwarts all year? But Snape can't just quit Hogwarts-he's supposedly also Voldemort's spy in the Order, and he is right where Voldemort would want him. On the other hand, if he is *forced out* by the curse, Voldemort may be angry, but he will also know why it happened, and can hardly suspect Snape, whom he has probably never told about the curse. If I'm right, I think that this plan, for Snape to 'go out into the cold', may be what was under discussion in the Forest when Hagrid overheard them. > quick_silver: > The other thing that's bothered me is the fact that Snape shouts out > dueling tips to Harry as he and Harry. The more that I think about > that scene the more uncontrolled it seems. I don't want to say that > Snape was panicking but playing it by ear maybe? I wonder if maybe > Snape was so emotional at the end of HBP because he really doesn't > know what to do next? zgirnius: Yes, I think so. Understandably, especially if there was no plan to kill Dumbledore. If my theory, outlined above, is true, then Snape has an interesting problem. On one hand, he is much better positioned to carry out DD's plan than either of them could have possibly anticipated. On the other hand, if the decision to kill Dumbledore was as Steve outlined made at the spur of the moment, it will be quite difficult to get anyone in the Order to listen. --zgirnius, hoping she is not boring the list with a repeat of this theory, which may have been lost in the shuffle as she posted it originally in response to Sherry's excellent Chap. 8 discussion From juli17 at aol.com Wed Jan 25 07:02:37 2006 From: juli17 at aol.com (juli17 at aol.com) Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2006 02:02:37 EST Subject: Do any list members think Dumbledore might have asked Snape to kill him? Message-ID: <2b5.36c44ef.31087c8d@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 147015 Steve wrote: First, stop and think of how that conspiritorial conversation would have gone. Dumbledore calls Snape to his office and says - "I've got a great idea. First, we talk Draco into fixing the vanishing cabinet. Then we bring a pack of marauding Death Eaters into the castle. Then you suggest that the DE's set off the Dark Mark at the top of the tower. Then when I show up, you rush to the tower and kill me. It's foolproof. What could go wrong?" Sorry, but that is far too unlikely a plan for me or Snape to ever swallow, or for Dumbledore to ever conceive. However, in that final moment at the top of the tower, I can see Dumbledore saying "...Severus ...please ...you understand the situation. You know there is only one 'best' way out. Do what you know you must do to salvage this situation and protect the innocent (meaning Harry and Draco). Do what you know will produce the best possible outcome in the struggle against Voldemort." I assume there was a degree of Legilimency involved, but I think the bulk of it stems from Dumbledore's earlier emphasis that Harry's well being must be protected AT ALL COSTS, and the cost in that terrible moment was Dumbledore's life. Julie: I think it was actually a combination of the two above. Dumbledore didn't have a single plan but a set of contigencies. He knew he was dying (from the beginning of HBP--the dead hand), he knew Draco was tasked with killing him, he knew Snape made the unbreakable vow to protect Draco/complete Draco's task or die. And yes, these are all assumptions, but they rest on some evidence, and if they are all true, then Dumbledore had reason to establish contingency plans. One of which would have been as you say above, that the innocent must be protected above all, that Harry's life--and Snape's life--is far more important than Dumbledore's fading life, and that Snape must do whatever it takes to preserve those more important lives, including sacrificing Dumbledore if it ever comes to that. Which they are no doubt hoping fervently it does not. But that hope was in vain. This also explains the conversation Hagrid overheard in the forest, when Snape said Dumbledore was asking too much, and that he didn't want to do it anymore. He didn't want to kill Dumbledore, even in the worst case scenario, didn't want to even consider it. But Dumbledore insisted Snape keep his promise (to do whatever Dumbledore asks--shades of Harry in the cave--or specifically to carry out the worst case contingency plan Dumbledore had proposed). So I agree that there was no plan for the specific events on the Tower, just a contigency agreement about who would live or die if the worst possible thing came to pass. Which it did. Julie [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From literature_Caro at web.de Tue Jan 24 12:28:53 2006 From: literature_Caro at web.de (literature_Caro) Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2006 13:28:53 +0100 Subject: Thestrals be the key In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <1287135119.20060124132853@web.de> No: HPFGUIDX 147016 I lost track to the discussion, but I think it hasn't been mentioned yet, that the thestrals may be a way for Harry to get hold of the horcruxes left. They can find any Place, even if you Don't know where it is. Yours Caro From olivier.fouquet+harry at m4x.org Wed Jan 25 08:18:20 2006 From: olivier.fouquet+harry at m4x.org (olivierfouquet2000) Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2006 08:18:20 -0000 Subject: The Secret Revealed! ESE!Arthur In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147017 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Geoff Bannister" wrote: > Geoff: > But how do you explain Harry's vision of the attack in OOTP? Surely > Arthur couldn't produce the impression which Harry had of being the > snake? > > And how do Arthur's injuries which brought him to St.Mungo's fit in > with this intriguing theory? He was supposed to have wounds that would > not heal properly for example. Had he got nurses who were secret > supporters with him? Or were they under the Imperius curse? If so, he > had been very busy with his wand. > Olivier Right, let's go back to what happened. LV possessed a snake and attacked a sleeping Arthur. He wounded him badly, and Arthur would have died if he hadn't been discovered. Now think about it: why didn't LV kill Arthur once and for all? Arthur was unconscious, defenseless. One more bite and he was gone. The ESE!Arthur theory simply states that Arthur and LV deliberately engineered this attack. Arthur was going to be hurt badly enough so that Harry would be absolutely convinced his visions were important and necessary. You'll notice that it's when Harry mentions this event that Ron is convinced that Sirius is trapped in the Ministry, and the change of allegiance of Ron is what finally switches the balance. Suppose now Arthur had died (much more realistic, seeing he was already almost dead and pitched against Voldemort). Then Harry would have been devastated but would have had an incredibly strong motivation to learn Occlumency ('Do it for my Dad, Harry' said Ron miserably not to mention that Harry wouldn't want to witness his friends dying one after the other under his own eyes). You'll find more about it in my original post ESE!Arthur, #129892. Here are a few additional arguments quoted from my original post. Arthur, of course, knows everything about the Triwizard Tournament in GoF (the book where serious doubts about him start) so he tipped his Master, and ensures that everyone knows he thinks highly of Moody in order to reinforce Barty's cover. He also covered for Barty right after Barty's attack on Moody. Think about it: a powerful and paranoid Auror is defeated by a man that has just passed many years under the Imperius curse without leaving any spurious hints? I believe their fight left many signs that were removed by Arthur. Remark, by the way, how very similar his behavior towards Malfoy is to his behavior towards Shacklebolt in OoP. We assume that the former is genuine and the later staged, but what if it was the reverse? He could also have tipped the Malfoys about 12, Grimmauld Place via Kreacher. As it is, I personally don't believe in any theory. So Lupin could be evil, Arthur could be Voldemort right-hand's man, Crookshanks could be the Animagus form of Florence spying for Dumbledore's brother who really is Hermione in disguise. But I'll wait and see. Olivier From olivier.fouquet+harry at m4x.org Wed Jan 25 08:30:18 2006 From: olivier.fouquet+harry at m4x.org (olivierfouquet2000) Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2006 08:30:18 -0000 Subject: ESE!Lupin condensed and Lupin and Sirius replies In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147018 > Neri: >In comparison, > ESE!Lupin doesn't solve any official mysteries. There is practically > no need for it except that it would be bangy. Olivier Not only does it solve only non-mysteries, it suddenly generates a flurry of new mysteries. Lupin has had a dozen opportunities to act as a magnificent agent of Voldemort and he did not. To name but a few, he could have killed Sirius or delivered him to the Dementors at any point during the Shrieking Shack event. no one would have blamed him, he might even be the first werewolf to gain an order of Merlin first class and a thank you note from LV. He could have helped Peter find and take care of LV, and if he did, LV shows very poor gratitude in the graveyard (the argument about not blowing out Lupin's cover his feeble, LV blew Lucius' cover and Lucius is a very useful spy in the Ministry during OoP, arguably LV's most useful DE : his cover rested solely on Fudge's disbelief of Harry). He could have let Harry throw himself through the veil (JKR insists numerous times that Harry fights "viciously" and "with every bit of strength" against Lupin and that Lupin later maintains a "precautionary grip" on Harry). We don't know what happens exactly when one jumps through the veil, but it can't be too good. Again, the argument "LV wants HP for himself" is very feeble (and thus a hint that Snape is not entirely devoted to LV): Snape is the only one that seems to believe this, all the other DE are quite keen to kill Harry. Bella is very suspicious of Snape (and for good reasons). Based on what we know, she should be even more suspicious of Lupin: he has done even less than Snape for LV during OoP, he cannot even boast about informations, since he had none to offer about DD and joined the last battle... but on the wrong side. The way the battle is told, forces are about evenly matched before DD arrives, so Bella, while right to suspect Snape, should be infuriated by Lupin. Then, again, he fought on DD's side at the end of HBP, another situation where forces seemed evenly matched. If Snape, LV's most useful spy, thought the time had come to reveal himself, why didn't Lupin? At least, Snape manages to knock Flitwick down without blowing his cover (and that was a master move, seeing as Flitwick was a dueling champion, Hermione dixit, and a most powerful wizard in Harry's opinion "Harry was certain [ ] Flitwick could have removed the swamp in an instant"). What did Lupin: according to the testimonies of various person (including Harry), his presence avoided disaster. Tonks says the Order was losing, imagine with one Order member down and one DE up (not to mention that Lupin, Cedric's killer remember, the Muggles killer, remember could at least have killed one or two members by stabbing them in the back). > > Pippin: > > I think that if the body of the deceased has fresh > > blood on it a considerable interval of time after it's supposed > > to have died of a curse that doesn't leave any trace -- > > well, if that's not meant to be a clue, then JKR *is* a > > terrible mystery writer. > > > > Neri: > If that's not meant to be a clue, then JKR is perhaps a terrible > mystery writer in Agatha Christy's standards. But is she writing a > Christy style mystery? In my opinion, JKR is indeed a terrible mystery writer. However, she is im my opinion a superb writer of Bildungsroman. In the journey from childhood to adulthood, an adolescent is confronted to mysteries (who was his father? what is this strange force that seems to have been unleashed now that I'm a teenager?). This explains the mystery element of the series. But the emphasis is not there. Not *who* but *how*. Olivier From vuurdame at xs4all.nl Wed Jan 25 12:21:15 2006 From: vuurdame at xs4all.nl (festuco) Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2006 12:21:15 -0000 Subject: Draco and Harry (was:The GoF Train Scene - and beyond...) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147019 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "horridporrid03" wrote: > > >>Gerry: > > The difference is that Ron is interested and Draco is prejudiced. > > Betsy Hp: > Ah, but it's Harry who wants to know all about Ron's blood-lines and > it's Harry who talks about how horrible his Muggle family is. If > Harry had taken this line of conversation with Draco, Draco would > have eaten it up with a spoon. I mean, yes Draco is prejudiced (as > he's been raised to be, never exposed to another way of thinking), > but again, Harry's conversation with Ron is not all that different > from Draco's conversation with Harry. Gerry: So? Harry is curious. He is interested about his fascinating new world. He has gotten snippets from the conversation with Draco and now tries to find out more from a source he likes. Harry wants to know about his world. That to me is very different about a conversation that is drenched with prejudice like Draco has. > Betsy Hp: > But Draco doesn't insult Lily on purpose. That's where the > misspeaking comes in, I think. If Draco had realized that this was > Harry Potter he was speaking to he probably would have asked Harry > about the horrors of being raised by Muggles, and Harry would have > been glad to fill him in. Yes he does. He gives his opinion about the 'other kind,' and he does so quite openly under the mistaken assumption he is talking to another pureblood. Now the 'other kind' happens to be Harry's mum. That Draco does not know that the boy's mum is the 'wrong kind' does not really matter to me. He gives his opinion about her just the same. Maybe if he did know he would have held his mouth shut, but he still would have felt the same way about Lily, so no sympathy for Draco on my part. > Betsy Hp: > And Draco was merely curious about the boy in the shop. It's just > that Ron had a better idea of what questions to ask because he had > some idea of who he was talking to. Ron is a lovely person, and he > makes a great friend. But he had a leg up on Draco, as it were. > And I also think his self-effacement (I'm nothing much, I'm so very > poor, I'll probably do horribly at Hogwarts) was much less > intimidating than Draco's confident "I am going to *shine* at that > school" for Harry, who was so worried about his own chances of > success at Hogwarts. Gerry I'm sorry but I could not disagree more. Yes, Draco makes Harry insecure. But that is not why he does not like him. It is the way Draco talks, the way he complains about not being allowed a racing broom, that all makes it clear this is one spoiled little brat. > > And while I'm not surprised Harry equated Draco with Dudley (being > so socially isolated it's no surprise Harry saw confidence as a > negative trait) Harry does get it wrong. Draco and Dudley have very > little in common. Actually, they have a lot in common. Both are bullies utterly spoiled by doting parents. Both want power, and both like to pick on people they consider inferiour. Gerry From amiabledorsai at yahoo.com Wed Jan 25 14:02:16 2006 From: amiabledorsai at yahoo.com (amiabledorsai) Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2006 14:02:16 -0000 Subject: Was the eavesdropper unimportant to Harry? WAS: Re: Snape again In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147020 quick_silver71 wrote: > To > a certain extent the ending of PoA is maybe the only part of the > novels where Snape is clearly wrong about something...and when Snape > gets it wrong boy does he get's it wrong. (Now forgive me...it's > been a while since I read PoA) Snape basically functions as > the...villian...or perhaps misguided, dangerous fool, with a > grudge...in a way that Peter simply does not. Snape threatens > people, he screams and carries on, he refuses to listen or see the > truth, etc. and in the end the Trio have to attack the man to shut > him up. He then proceeds to question Dumbledore's judgement, in > front of other people, and generally make an a** of himself ending > when he causes Lupin to lose his job. More than that, he poisons Fudge's mind against the testimony of The Trio by convincing him that their belief in Sirius's innocence is the result of their being confunded. As a result, Sirius remained a fugitive subject to the Kiss upon apprehension, and no Ministry effort was made to find Pettigrew. Assuming that Snape really is DDM, this is one of the most damaging "own goals" of the entire series. Aside from leaving Peter free to eventually resurrect Voldemort, Snape planted the seed of doubt that Rita Skeeter so lavishly fertilised, and that bloomed into Fudge's conclusion that Harry was a dangerous braggart. None of this has escaped Harry's attention, I'm sure. Amiable Dorsai From amiabledorsai at yahoo.com Wed Jan 25 14:14:42 2006 From: amiabledorsai at yahoo.com (amiabledorsai) Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2006 14:14:42 -0000 Subject: ESE!Lupin condensed and Lupin and Sirius replies In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147021 > Pippin: > The way Lupin acts ought to be enough to draw suspicion on him. > He's willing to kill in cold blood... > ... All purely speculative, contra-canonical and highly > convoluted, IMO, when all the time there's a simple but > heartbreaking answer: he's a killer. Or maybe a werewolf who forgot to take his potion and was on the cusp of transformation. Might make him a little testy. Amiable Dorsai From quigonginger at yahoo.com Wed Jan 25 14:27:50 2006 From: quigonginger at yahoo.com (quigonginger) Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2006 14:27:50 -0000 Subject: Why Tom left Merope In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147022 On the subject of Merope, Carol wrote: > > But IMO she was a victim of abuse and neglect who was never taught > > right from wrong (can you imagine lessons on morality from Marvolo > > Gaunt?) and never had a chance of meeting and falling in love with > > a suitable husband. Ginger, butting in: May I also add that Merope was on her own for the first time in her life without Marvolo and Morfin? Given the emphasis on maintaining the Slytherin line, I'm sure Marvolo had intentions of mating the last 2 remaining heirs of Slytherin to produce more heirs. (OK, maybe "sure" is a but much, but I'd put a few galleons on it.) So Merope is alone without her father for his 6 month incarceration, and Morfin is scheduled to get out after 3 years. Really, she only has 6 months to move out. Where will she go? How will she get by? Who will support her as she doesn't seem to have any job skills? The handsome Muggle who had captivated her attentions had it all. Looks, money, lots of land (everything on the other side of the valley, according to Tom). She only had 6 months to get him to dump Cecilia, fall in love with her and marry her and take her away. Desperate times call for desperate measures. In her case, it was wrong of her, but, as Carol pointed out, she didn't exactly have the upbringing to learn very good morals, especially about the treatment of Muggles. If we look at her as a desperate person fated to a life of matrimony with Morfin, living under her father's roof for the rest of her life, who now has a brief window of opportunity for escape, I think she becomes more understandable. Of course, there's no way Tom would have fallen for her, but we homely inbred chicks have to dream too, don't we? (Don't worry- I just dream, I'm not concocting potions...yet) Ginger, who feels as though she is being summoned by a certain other thread, but has nothing to add to it. From agdisney at msn.com Wed Jan 25 14:22:16 2006 From: agdisney at msn.com (Andrea Grevera) Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2006 09:22:16 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Patronus issues References: <7e.792f9516.31047500@aol.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147023 bboyminn: >> First we know that the messenger aspect of a Patronus is something conceived and refined by Dumbledore. No one else has figured this out. Wink: Well, Harry (and the readers of the books) have seen Dumbledore send messages via the Patronus, and now in HBP we see Tonks doing it. But where in the 6 published books is it shown or said that this was something conceived and refined by Dumbledore? Book, chapter, and or quote, please. Or do you know this only because JKR said so in an interview or on her web site? Andie: On JKR's web site, in FAQ she states: Members of the Order use their Patronuses to communicate with each other. They are the only wizards who know how to use their spirit quardians in this way & they have been taught to do so by DD (he invented this method of communication). [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Wed Jan 25 15:42:42 2006 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2006 15:42:42 -0000 Subject: Was the eavesdropper unimportant to Harry? WAS: Re: Snape again In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147024 Carol: > > Dumbledore tells Harry that LV's information about the Prophecy > > was incomplete because "the eavesdropper was detected only a > > short way into the prophecy and thrown from the building." > > > > Instead of saying, "What eavesdropper? What are you talking > > about?" Harry only says, "So he only heard . . . ?" and DD > > finishes the thought.... *Harry* clearly doesn't regard him as > > important at this point. Jen: > My guess is Harry had simply taken in too much information to > pursue the eavsdropper at that point. > A better case is made by the fact Harry never pursues this > information with Dumbledore until he hears Trelawney mention it. > Without being given specific canon, it does seem he forgot about it > until the moment he hears Snape was the eavesdropper. Now this is > conjecture, but I do think if Harry had learned the eavedropper was > *anyone* he knew he would have felt shock. SSSusan: I totally agree with this. Much seems to be being made of Harry's not pursuing information on the eavesdropper when he first learned of his existence... but to me it makes sense that he *didn't* pursue it. DD did not identify the person by name, and I've always assumed that Harry assumed that this meant it *wasn't anyone he knew*. Perhaps not very smart of Harry to make that assumption, but doesn't it make sense that he did? He probably figured if the eavesdropper was someone he knew or someone "important to the story," that DD would TELL him the name. He didn't, so Harry didn't ask. Thus, I think Jen is right that if Harry had discovered the eavesdropper was *anyone* he actually knew, he'd have been surprised. Then to find out that it wasn't only someone he actually knew, but that it was SNAPE must have left Harry simply bouleverse!! >From that, I'd go *totally* with what Magpie said yesterday here: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/146962 >>>The eavesdropper wasn't important until it was Snape because it was JUST SO DAMNED SNAPE to be the eavesdropper. Suddenly it's got an emotional component to it. He can imagine Snape being all Snapey--and probably imagines him doing it just to spite Harry even though Harry hadn't been born yet.<<< SSSusan again: I think this is the key -- Harry didn't even expect to recognize the name of the eavesdropper. That it was Snape only meant that his imagination could go wild with the possibilities! Jen: > I think Snape's greatest sin is that he hated James and he can > never overcome that in Harry's eyes, just as Harry can never > overcome being James' son. In the abstract Harry can hate the > person who betrayed his parents but when actually facing his > father's old friends and learning they cared about each other once, > the feelings change. There's no room for Snape in either > generation, he's the hated outsider to both the Marauders and the > Trio. SSSusan: Precisement! Carol: > > But I'm trying to point out how Harry's emotions shape > > his perception of the events at Godric's Hollow, how the blame for > > what happened keeps shifting away from Voldemort, and how Harry's > > hatred of Black in PoA parallels his hatred of Snape in HBP, with > > no such feelings attached to Wormtail. I see a parallel here > > between Black and Snape, and I'm trying to determine its > > significance. Can it be because Voldemort is insufficiently human > > to be an object of real hatred? Or do his parents' deaths become > > more real and painful to Harry when they're linked to people who > > knew them at Hogwarts rather than to the snake-faced monster for > > whom they had no human identity? Jen: > I see this as a pretty classic psychological mechanism. > Voldemort is overwhelming in his power and domination and Harry > doesn't see how it's possible to defeat him, even after Dumbledore > attempts to show him where the cracks are. SSSusan: And add to that the fact that Snape is very much in the here and now. Harry has encountered Voldemort, and he knows more is coming, but he doesn't have the ongoing interaction, the daily reminders of what's to hate and to suspect and fear that he has with Snape. I do believe Harry's hatred of Voldemort is real, as is his rage over the murders of his parents, and I believe in book 7 we *will* see Harry focus much, much more on that and on Voldemort. Not that he'll forget about his hatred of Snape! Oh, no, that'll continue! But JKR could do so many different things with that part of the story that I can't possibly predict when Harry will find out "the truth" [if Snape's truly DDM!], and *that* will make all the difference in how much focus will be placed on Snape. But anyway, this is the series' conclusion, and we know that DD spent a good, long time in HBP showing Harry all about Tom Riddle and Voldemort -- MAKING him more real to Harry, helping him learn how to "read" him, to see his weaknesses and motivations -- and I think all of that will lead to a change in book 7 for Harry, in terms of his focus on Voldemort over Snape. He is now more able to understand Voldemort, and that will make it easier to shift his focus to him (once he gets that matter of hating Snape for killing DD out of the way ;-)). Siriusly Snapey Susan, thinking en francais for some reason today From kchuplis at alltel.net Wed Jan 25 15:59:48 2006 From: kchuplis at alltel.net (Karen) Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2006 09:59:48 -0600 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Was the eavesdropper unimportant to Harry? WAS: Re: Snape again References: Message-ID: <002301c621c8$5e4ae420$b301010a@ConsolidatedTelephone.local> No: HPFGUIDX 147025 From: amiabledorsai More than that, he poisons Fudge's mind against the testimony of The Trio by convincing him that their belief in Sirius's innocence is the result of their being confunded. As a result, Sirius remained a fugitive subject to the Kiss upon apprehension, and no Ministry effort was made to find Pettigrew. Assuming that Snape really is DDM, this is one of the most damaging "own goals" of the entire series. Aside from leaving Peter free to eventually resurrect Voldemort, Snape planted the seed of doubt that Rita Skeeter so lavishly fertilised, and that bloomed into Fudge's conclusion that Harry was a dangerous braggart. None of this has escaped Harry's attention, I'm sure. kchuplis: Now, here I think it is rather more a reflection just on Snape because, I don't think he had to convince Fudge of anything. Fudge is scared STIFF of anything irregular and never shows a particular bit of brilliance. He's the guy who always plays it safe. I think it would have been that he believed the kids were hoodwinked no matter what, even if Snape wasn't there freaking out. I just don't think it is in Fudge's nature (and this was born out in the following books) to accept things that seem to unusual. If it isn't in his comfort zone, he will find a way to explain it. ONce his ways of explaining it get unreasonably absurd he might be in a frame of mind to accept something else, but until then, I think he would supply these explanations on his own without out any help from meltdown!Snape. From rlai1977 at yahoo.com Wed Jan 25 16:05:57 2006 From: rlai1977 at yahoo.com (rlai1977) Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2006 16:05:57 -0000 Subject: Why Tom left Merope /Draco and Harry In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147026 Carol responds: > Maybe I'm just old-fashioned, but I have difficulty conceiving of the > seduction of a man by a woman as rape. The sex wasn't forced. He had > to have wanted it or it could not have happened. IMO what Merope did to Tom Sr was not significantly different from men putting women on rape drugs (like R2) and have sex with them while they were under the drug's influence. Merope did NOT just "seduce" Tom- you described how unattractive she was yourself- so what qualities of hers drew Tom to WILLINGLY have sex with her? If Merope were a man, putting some muggle girl on love potion and made her have sex with him without a struggle because her brain was totally messed up and she had this artificial/induced idea that she "loved" him, it would have been painfully obvious that it was RAPE. I have sympathy for Merope for who she was, she *was* abused by both her father and her brother. But what she did was still inexcusable, and I totally do not believe Tom Sr did anything unreasonable by ditching her, pregnant or not. I pity Tom even more to have not even the option of abortion! Also, my idea of *loving* someone is to treat that person with kindness, NOT to abuse/manipulate them. So while Merope gets my sympathy for being born/raised into thinking to love someone is to rape them using drug, Tom Sr was totally faultless in my book for not taking this "love" into consideration when he chose to leave- he was the *victim* of this "love", after all. RP From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Wed Jan 25 16:14:35 2006 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2006 16:14:35 -0000 Subject: Merope's "utter selfishness"? (was: Why Tom left Merope) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147027 Carol: > > I agree that Tom Sr. never loved Merope; he never *could* have > > loved her because, poor thing, she was so unloveable. But he > > could at least have hidden her away somewhere and provided for > > their unborn child once he recovered from the shock of having > > married and impregnated her. But he was rich, handsome, and > > arrogant (GoF chap. 1). Betsy Hp: > Not arrogant enough, unfortunately. He had some sympathy towards > Merope (so she must have been somewhat loveable) and she used it to > take him as her pet. And, having never had any toys before, she > broke him. Then, in an act of utter selfishness, she couldn't even > be bothered to try and stick around for her son. Huh. Maybe I'm > not all that sympathetic after all. SSSusan: Ooooh, you had me ALL the way to here, Betsy. Even right up to Merope having never had a toy before, she broke this one. ;-) But to call what she did at the orphanage "an act of utter selfishness"? I can't go that far. She had been left by Tom, she was flat broke, she had no family she could turn to for help, and no assets left. Did you not feel despair in what she did? desperation? depression? (Hmmm -- a different 3 Ds from the 3 Ds we get introduced to with apparition lessons.) I do think Merope was despondent, desperate and depressed, and to me that's enough to remove the label "utter selfishness" from the action she took. Without context I'd call it that, but with the context, I cut her some slack for seeing no way out. Siriusly Snapey Susan From kchuplis at alltel.net Wed Jan 25 16:25:42 2006 From: kchuplis at alltel.net (Karen) Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2006 10:25:42 -0600 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Why Tom left Merope /Draco and Harry References: Message-ID: <000601c621cb$fcdd7f50$b301010a@ConsolidatedTelephone.local> No: HPFGUIDX 147028 From: rlai1977 I have sympathy for Merope for who she was, she *was* abused by both her father and her brother. But what she did was still inexcusable, and I totally do not believe Tom Sr did anything unreasonable by ditching her, pregnant or not. I pity Tom even more to have not even the option of abortion! Also, my idea of *loving* someone is to treat that person with kindness, NOT to abuse/manipulate them. So while Merope gets my sympathy for being born/raised into thinking to love someone is to rape them using drug, Tom Sr was totally faultless in my book for not taking this "love" into consideration when he chose to leave- he was the *victim* of this "love", after all. kchuplis: Well, I think we can all agree that obsession is in the genes of Slytherins. Merope was probably more accurately described as obsessed with Tom Sr. than in love. LV is obsessed with staving off death and controlling people. They have no "off" switch really. Well, Merope did- death. I suppose "obsession" is yet another leit motif in these books. Or at least the danger of obsession. Before posting to any list, you MUST read the group's Admin File! http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/files/Admin_Files/HBF_Text__MUST_READ Please use accurate subject headings and snip unnecessary material from posts to which you're replying! SPONSORED LINKS Half-blood prince Adult education Culture club Organizational culture YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS Visit your group "HPforGrownups" on the web. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: HPforGrownups-unsubscribe at yahoogroups.com Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. From iam.kemper at gmail.com Wed Jan 25 18:26:46 2006 From: iam.kemper at gmail.com (Kemper) Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2006 10:26:46 -0800 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Do any list members think Dumbledore might have asked Snape to kill him? In-Reply-To: References: <000001c62047$f28754c0$7f56a4ac@Overton> Message-ID: <700201d40601251026h2fe0a02bp81784ef0899305c4@mail.gmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 147029 On 1/24/06, Steve wrote: > > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Corey Overton" > wrote: > > > > Hi list members, how's it going? Are any list members of the > > view that Dumbledore might have asked Snape to kill Dumbledore > > because he was dying anyway? I think Snape killed Dumbledore > > because he's with Voldemort. Just wondering what people think. > > > > Your fellow member, > > Corey > > > > bboyminn: > > Despite how many times this has been discussed, I doubt that it can > every be resolved until we have the last book. Even then, it may not > be completely resolved. > > Personally, I resist all speculation that Dumbledore and Snape sat > down and conspired for Snape to kill Dumbledore. That is too far > fetched and most unlikely. However, I don't have a problem with > Dumbledore impressing on Snape that Harry's life was of vital > important, and that Harry's life was more valuable than even his own > (Dumbledore's that is). > ... .. . Kemper now: So are you saying that Snape didn't come to Dumbledore about the UV even with all its loop-holes? I suspect Snape told Dumbledore after which Dumbledore in all his wisdom discussed a contingency plan based on the slight possibility that Snape might be expected to kill Dumbledore, again in spite of the obvious loop-holes. . Why would Snape kill Dumbledore when there's the option to make it look like a killing? The answer is obvious from the OFH!Snapers and the ESE!Snapers but not to this DDM!Snaper. I don't see DDM!Snape killing Dumbledore. It doesn't make sense. If he did kill Dumbledore, it won't be because he had no other recourse: . >From DD to Draco: the idea of hiding in Death. >From Fake!Moody to 4th years and from Bellatrix to Harry: you have to mean the curse, you have to desire it. Casting the curse or any spell without the necessary intent/desire will make the curse/spell weak if it works at all. Saying an incantation doesn't make a spell successful. There is countless canon for this from Charms classes to Transfiguration classes, from Patronus lessons to the DA. . If Snape did kill Dumbledore, then he is not Dumbledore's man. . >From Snape's first lesson: a brew to stopper death. >From DD to MacGonagall: trusting Hagrid with his life. . How do the last two relate? I'm supposing that DD, a man late in life, may have a list of things to do in case he's dead. One of those things would be to pour some amount of the brew into his mouth. Just in case. Just in case he's not comatose and about to suffocate in a tomb or, worse, be cremated. I see the brew as liquid cryonics. Hagrid carried, seemingly, Dumbledore's body and therefore, seemingly, Hagrid prepared the body for burial. Anyone at the funeral could have brought the body to the alter by magic or physique, except for Figg and Filch, but it was Hagrid as though this was requested of him. . Steve, you asked once why? Why would Dumbledore be alive? What purpose does his living serve the story? . 2/3 of the Horcruxes seem to require the aid of Snape. It seems likely that Harry may require the same help with at least one other (not the snake). I think many of us see this as a probability and I think you even proposed a similar scenario. But Harry won't trust Snape unless he is given some proof. That proof will be Dumbledore's life, comatose or not. . Kemper, 1/5 read of Ptomey's Gate... who wishes he could read at work as well as reading/responding to email. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From lolita_ns at yahoo.com Wed Jan 25 18:30:09 2006 From: lolita_ns at yahoo.com (lolita_ns) Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2006 18:30:09 -0000 Subject: Snape and DD In-Reply-To: <20060125032417.39682.qmail@web53309.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147030 > Tonks wrote: Here is an interesting idea. I wonder if Snape is related to DD in > someway. JKR has said that she told us nothing about DD's family for a > reason and that if we explored his family line we might find something > of interest. Lolita: I don't think so. She has enough on Snape already without making him DD's great-great-grandson. Besides, I think that DD's trusting Snape without additional familial relationship between the two is a far stronger argument in favour of both of them than if they were somehow related to each other. (I would take someone's undying trust in their grandson as more biased than their undying trust in a person who's not a part of their family). DD's vouch for Snape after LV's fall, in the first place, would have been taken with a pinch of salt, no matter what the Ministry officials' view of DD had been, if Snape was his grandson. And I don't think that such information would have or could have been kept secret - anyone can finecomb old Prophets and find information on people who got married and the children who were born to them. Also, *someone* would have mentioned it after the murder of DD that he was murdered by his own flesh and blood, if that had been the case. And no one says anything to that regard - not only the staff at Hogwarts, but the Ministry and the Daily Prophet as well. I can only think of one reason why - there is no such connection between DD and SS. Also, Hermione looked up Eileen Prince and didn't encounter any information about EP being a descendant of DD. Such information, I repeat, would hardly be classified, so I would presume that the reason why Hermione didn't find it was because the families weren't connected. You just know that Hermione would do her job well - she managed to find records of EP's marriage and childbirth - in decades- old newpapers. And she found no evidence on EP being related to DD. A lot of people are constantly looking for DD's descendant in the series (e.g. Harry, before Rowling debunked it). But, from what has been shown to us in books as well as in interviews, it is more likely that DD was a loner. He doesn't seem like a type who would have settled down with a wife and had any children, grandchildren, etc, even if the alleged marriage happened as far back in the past as a hundred years ago. As far as DD's family being a profitable line of inquiery is concerned, I would combine that statement with the one where Rowling said that we wouldn't be introduced to any new characters of importance, but that we would meet an Order member whom we haven't yet met properly. I think that both of these statements point to Aberforth Dumbledore, who has yet to give us *his* version of the events that took place in the night of the Prophecy. > Luckdragon: > Canon tells us that all pureblood wizarding families are inter- related, so there must be a relationship of some kind. Lolita: Actually, we don't know that the Prince family was pureblood. That is something Harry presumes, while he's looking for the parallels between Snape and LV, but the actual text says nothing about it. This post has turned out to be more a reply to Tonks's than to yours, but... Oh, well. Cheers, Lolita. From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Wed Jan 25 19:09:07 2006 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2006 19:09:07 -0000 Subject: Was the eavesdropper unimportant to Harry? WAS: Re: Snape again In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147031 SSSusan: > Much seems to be being made of Harry's not pursuing information on the eavesdropper when he first learned of his existence... but to me it makes sense that he *didn't* pursue it. DD did not identify the person by name, and I've always assumed that Harry assumed that this meant it *wasn't anyone he knew*. Perhaps not very smart of Harry to make that assumption, but doesn't it make sense that he did? He probably figured if the eavesdropper was someone he knew or someone "important to the story," that DD would TELL him the name. He didn't, so Harry didn't ask. Carol responds: Exactly. The eavesdropper was "not important to the story." Not significantly guilty, not a criminal on the level of the betrayer (PP), not guilty of the murders of the Potters. Only an informer doing his job for LV. If Harry had thought he was important, he would have demanded to know his identity. Instead, he realizes that it's LV and his interpretation of the information that's important, and he forgets about the eavesdropper for a whole year. > SSS: > Thus, I think Jen is right that if Harry had discovered the eavesdropper was *anyone* he actually knew, he'd have been surprised. Then to find out that it wasn't only someone he actually knew, but that it was SNAPE must have left Harry simply bouleverse!! Carol responds: Yes, of course. He'd have been *surprised* if it was anyone he knew. But it's only when Harry knows it's *Snape* that the eavesdropper role becomes *significant* to him. My point is that, to Harry, the unknown eavesdropper was *not* a criminal equal in importance to Voldemort himself or to his parents' betrayer, or Harry would have demanded to know his identity (which DD obviously knew). He (the eavesdropper) was only the source of information that *LV* interpreted to (the as yet unborn) Harry's disadvantage. As DD says later, after Harry knows that Snape was the eavesdropper, he (the eavesdropper) had no way of knowing who the unborn child would be. The eavesdropper also had no way of knowing (as *Harry* implies in OoP) that LV would attempt to kill an infant rather than waiting to see which boy born at the end of July turned out to be a threat. He was just a DE passing on information to his boss about a potential threat. So, unlike the betrayer (PP), a friend of the Potters directly instrumental in bringing about their deaths and therefore someone Harry would naturally hate, the eavesdropper was unimportant--just some unknown DE who happened to provide LV with information. He (Harry) placed the blame for the *interpretation and use* of that information where it belonged, and for the resulting murders, squarely on the shoulders of LV. If the eavesdropper had been Lucius Malfoy, Harry's reaction would have been, "I knew it! He's evil!" And then he would have let it go because it did nothing to change his mental picture fo Draco's father. If it had been Mundungus Fletcher, he would have said, "That scumbag! Dumbledore should never have let him into the Order!" But it would not have been personal. Harry would not have gone ballistic and accused Dung of *murdering* his parents. He would have remembered that it was *Voldemort* who killed them and PP who betrayed them. The anger would have been temporary, as it was when he discovered Dung with goods stolen from 12 GP, and the eavesdropper role would have retained its relative insignificance. It's only Snape, whom Harry is determined to hate, for whom the eavesdropper role is given exaggerated significance, greater than that of the betrayer Pettigrew, who now seems to be forgotten, despite the fact that he restored Voldemort's body and killed Cedric Diggory. We don't hear Harry saying, "If I meet Wormtail, so much the worse for him!" And yet, setting aside the death of Dumbledore (which has yet to be fully explained), Wormtail's sins against Harry are much greater than Snape's. IOW, the eavesdropper role really is *not* important except as the means by which LV first heard a portion of the Prophecy and *chose* to try to prevent its fulfillment, instead beginning the process of fulfillment (and creating his own nemesis by giving Harry powers he would not otherwise have had). The betrayer role, in contrast, *is* important. Peter Pettigrew made possible the murder of the Potters by revealing their whereabouts. That he was their trusted friend makes his crime all the worse. And yet it's the *eavesdropper* (who, according to DD, regrets his role and tried to prevent the Potters' deaths) whom Harry regards as their murderer (*before* the death of DD seems to confirm his suspicions of Snape). Why? *Not* because the role of eavesdropper is important in itself. Clearly it isn't, or Harry would not have forgotten about it until Trelawney revealed the eavesdropper's identity (though what actually happened remains unclear and the accounts are contradictory). The eavesdropper only *becomes* important to Harry when Harry learns that he's Snape. One more reason to hate him; one more reason why DD is "wrong" to distrust him. Somehow the eavesdropper is now more important in Harry's view, more guilty, more evil, than the so-called friend who betrayed them to their deaths. Harry's exaggerated reaction to Trelawney's revelation reminds me of young James, who attacks young Severus without warning and without provocation, two on one, "because he exists" (except that James is calm and Harry is furious). It's not what Snape did but *who he is* that makes the eavesdropper suddenly important to Harry, raised from the level of informer to murderer. If the eavesdropper were Dung or Lucius or Ludo Bagman or anyone else Harry knows, he would remain an informer--instrumental in the murders, maybe, but not guilty of murder himself. Carol, who thinks that Snape's role in the deaths of Harry's parents is small compared to Wormtail's and that, unlike Wormtail, he tried to prevent the murders--and to atone for his sin when he failed From foxmoth at qnet.com Wed Jan 25 19:11:24 2006 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2006 19:11:24 -0000 Subject: ESE!Lupin condensed and Lupin and Sirius replies In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147032 > Neri: . But AFAIK there isn't in the books any similar clue suggesting > "Wormtail" might be someone other than Pettigrew, certainly not > something that is highlighted as an official mystery. Pippin: The identity of the person who hexed Harry's broom in PS/SS is not an "official" mystery either. Nobody except Hagrid ever suggests that it wasn't Snape. Interestingly, Hagrid is the only character in HBP to suggest that Harry might have misunderstood what happened on the tower, which you also seem to feel is not an "official" mystery. The identity of Wormtail *is* an "official" mystery, at least until Lupin says, "Peter is Wormtail." At that point it seems solved -- but what if it isn't? There are mysteries for which we are given provisional solutions which in later books turn out to be incomplete...why Dumbledore left Harry at the Dursleys, for example, or why Snape hates the Marauders. There is usually some hint that they are partial, as there is in this case. You can find plenty of debates on this list over whether Snape knew the Marauder nicknames or recognized the names on the map from some other source. The Pensieve scene in OOP does not really answer the question, as it's not clear how much of the MWPP dialogue Snape could hear at the time. Wormtail's inconsistent ability *is* an "official" mystery: "But Wormtail --displaying a presence of mind I would never have expected of him--convinced Bertha Jorkins to accompany him on a night-time stroll." --GoF ch 33. What can kill unicorns is also an "official" mystery. Wormtail is able to prepare a potion "concocted from unicorn blood" with no explanation of how a "poor wizard" like Peter would obtain it. Quirrell was able to kill unicorns, supposedly, but Quirrell is now dead, so who is helping Voldemort kill unicorns in GoF? Hagrid said a werewolf couldn't do it, but the unicorns in PS/SS were attacked previous to the night of Harry's detention. "Second time in a week." Hagrid says, "I found one dead last Wednesday." Hagrid knows that a non- wizard werewolf couldn't catch one, and the attacks are too spaced out to have been done at full moon. But he's not thinking about someone casting a spell -- and now we know that there's a spell that causes terrible slashing cuts, and the Marauders knew it. Why Dumbledore is so confident that a supposed murderer's escape will prove a godsend is also an "official" mystery. One possible explanation is that Peter is no occlumens and Dumbledore knows he couldn't have been the spy. Your interpretation of Wormtail's line "The boy is nothing to me, nothing to me at all!" is that Voldemort doesn't know it's a lie. But a legilimens does not detect objective truth. He can only detect the thoughts and feelings that contradict the lie. Voldemort does not believe that any of his servants are faithful to him. He has no comprehension of human ties whatever. If Wormtail feels some underlying loyalty to Harry, how would Voldemort detect it? He has never felt such things himself. Indeed he consistently underestimates what people are willing to do for one another -- he never thought that Lily would throw herself in front of Harry, and he thinks she was a fool to do so even though it resulted in his discorporation. Inviting people to forswear their ties to one another floats his boat -- it validates his choice to live as he does. He did it to Lily, he does it to Wormtail here, and he'll do it to the Malfoys in HBP. In short, IMO, if the sentence were changed to "My life debt to Harry Potter is nothing to me, nothing to me at all!" Voldemort would accept it just as easily. Whether Dumbledore was reckless in trusting Snape is also an "official" mystery. At least automatically assuming Lupin was worthy of trust is a far more understandable mistake. > Neri: > Here is my own explanation for Lupin's behavior. I think that JKR is > slightly guilty of plot-device-ness here (what is the proper literary > term?). She needs Pettigrew to leave the Shack with a Life Debt to > Harry. So Pettigrew must have died if not for Harry, and Harry alone > is allowed to save him. Well, Sirius definitely would kill Pettigrew, > but Lupin must go along with him. Otherwise Pettigrew would have owed > his Debt to Lupin. Pippin: That's a stretch, IMO. Why not have Lupin suggest taking the other children back to the castle? Surely Ron and Hermione don't need to see Pettigrew die? Indeed, the evil plot-device fairy was very busy with Lupin that night. First she made him forget that he was going to transform, then he forgot that Snape would be bringing the potion, then he forgot to de-activate the Marauder's Map, then he overlooked Harry's invisibility cloak, then he forgot his duty as a teacher to ignore Ron's protests and splint his leg, then he forgot that killing would split his and Sirius's souls (surely as a DADA teacher he would know that?), and he constantly forgot that he wasn't the leader of the gang and should therefore not be telling Sirius what to do. It's a strange thing. My theory is unashamedly plot-driven, yet it allows the characters to behave in character-driven ways, while your theory, which is supposedly character-driven, appears to require clumsy plotting to support it. > > Pippin: > > I think that if the body of the deceased has fresh > > blood on it a considerable interval of time after it's supposed > > to have died of a curse that doesn't leave any trace -- > > well, if that's not meant to be a clue, then JKR *is* a > > terrible mystery writer. > > > > Neri: > If that's not meant to be a clue, then JKR is perhaps a terrible > mystery writer in Agatha Christy's standards. But is she writing a > Christy style mystery? Pippin: It really doesn't matter what style or genre she's writing in. Unless you can explain why it improves the story for JKR to ignore the interior logic of the rules she herself has invented in a crucial scene involving the principal characters, it's bad writing for her to do so. Olivier: To name but a few, he could have killed Sirius or delivered him to the Dementors at any point during the Shrieking Shack event. no one would have blamed him, he might even be the first werewolf to gain an order of Merlin first class and a thank you note from LV. Pippin: You're forgetting that it's Pettigrew he wants here, not Sirius. But he also wants to know whose side Sirius is on, and how far he can depend on him. Olivier: He could have helped Peter find and take care of LV, and if he did, LV shows very poor gratitude in the graveyard (the argument about not blowing out Lupin's cover his feeble, LV blew Lucius' cover and Lucius is a very useful spy in the Ministry during OoP, arguably LV's most useful DE : his cover rested solely on Fudge's disbelief of Harry). Pippin: Lucius and all the other DE's named at the graveyard had already been openly accused of being Death Eaters. Dumbledore already had reason to suspect them. Naming them was Voldemort's way of punishing them for denying their allegiance to him. Olivier: He could have let Harry throw himself through the veil (JKR insists numerous times that Harry fights "viciously" and "with every bit of strength" against Lupin and that Lupin later maintains a "precautionary grip" on Harry). Pippin: If Lupin knows and believes the entire prophecy, he knows that the Veil will not kill the Chosen One. So if Harry is killed by it, he's not the Chosen One, and his death would be pointless. Anyway, he hasn't got anything against Harry personally, he just wants Voldemort victorious over the Ministry (IMO). I doubt he cares very much what happens to Voldie once the Ministry is out of the way. LV seems awfully well-informed about Dumbledore's movements. Rosmerta notified Draco that Dumbledore had gone to Hogsmeade, but who notified the Death Eaters that the time for the attack had come? Who petrified Fenrir? Why is the DE on top of the tower found "stupefied" when Harry used the full body bind? That plot device fairy's been busy again I suppose-- strange how she has to work overtime when Lupin's around! Anyway, if one purpose of The Plan was to force Snape into the open (and I think it was) then it wouldn't have done for the Death Eaters to win the battle before Snape reached the battlement. Lupin clearly didn't want or expect Dumbledore to die -- I believe he thought Dumbledore was so powerful that nothing could harm him. Pippin From AllieS426 at aol.com Wed Jan 25 19:34:57 2006 From: AllieS426 at aol.com (allies426) Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2006 19:34:57 -0000 Subject: Thestrals be the key In-Reply-To: <1287135119.20060124132853@web.de> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147033 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, literature_Caro wrote: > > I lost track to the discussion, but I think it hasn't been mentioned > yet, that the thestrals may be a way for Harry to get hold of the > horcruxes left. They can find any Place, even if you Don't know where > it is. > > Yours Caro > Allie: Very good call, it's pretty much ironclad that anything new that appears in one book will appear again with more significance in later books. Dobby (who led us to Winky), Polyjuice Potion, giants, Fawkes and on and on... I was wondering about thestrals myself ("hmm, will we see these again?") while perusing OoTP. From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Wed Jan 25 19:36:46 2006 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2006 19:36:46 -0000 Subject: Do any list members think Dumbledore might have asked Snape to kill him? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147034 Quick_Silver wrote: > Now I'm going to disagree with you about the killing of Dumbledore > being about saving Harry the Tower scene doesn't really seem to be > about Harry IMO. Dumbledore had plenty of time on the Tower to send > Harry to either safety (they still had brooms) or to send Harry > through the school to wait for DE's at the bottom of the Tower (in > hindsight that makes the most tactical sense IMO with Harry waiting > at the bottom it's possible not a single DE except maybe Snape > would have escaped). Instead Dumbledore keeps Harry on the Tower > under the cloak to witness what occurs with Draco, the DE's, and > Snape. Not so much for Harry's safety but so that Harry can see > what happens because Harry needs to know. The scene on the > Tower, IMO, sometimes comes across as Dumbledore's last lesson to > pass on to Harry, the last thing that Dumbledore is going to teach > to Harry. SSSusan: I'm a little puzzled by this. NOT that I disagree with you that DD wanted Harry to witness the scene but with the notion that there WAS time/opportunity to have sent Harry to safety or through the school. I just finished a re-read a couple of nights ago, and so I'm pretty sure that there wasn't time AT ALL. DD tells Harry to go -- to go and get Snape, not Madam Pomfrey -- and Harry turns to do so, but before he can leave, Draco bursts through the door. JUST before Draco uses expelliarmus to disarm DD, DD freezes Harry under his cloak. So, I guess I disagree that DD **opted** not to send Harry to safety or on a mission in the castle and instead chose to have Harry stay and learn a lesson. Harry *was* going to set off to get Snape but there wasn't time to leave the tower before Draco arrived. So DD made, imo, a SNAP decision to freeze Harry. It wasn't a long-thought- out decision that it was MORE important for Harry to stay and see what developed with Draco than it was to send Harry to safety or to wait for the DEs. Maybe I'm misunderstanding what you're saying, but when I read this, it sounded as if you felt DD had adequate TIME to choose among those three options (sending Harry somewhere safe, sending him to wait for the DEs, or having him stay on the tower to witness the Draco scene as it unfolded). IMO, he did NOT have time to choose among those and only chose to freeze Harry there when he realized Harry was not going to get the opportunity to go get Snape's help. Siriusly Snapey Susan, apologizing if she's missing the point here. From mudblood68 at yahoo.de Wed Jan 25 10:53:04 2006 From: mudblood68 at yahoo.de (Claudia) Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2006 10:53:04 -0000 Subject: Why DADA for Snape? (WAS Re: Do any list members think...) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147035 > zgirnius: > If my theory, outlined above, is true, then Snape > has an interesting problem. On one hand, he is much better positioned > to carry out DD's plan than either of them could have possibly > anticipated. On the other hand, if the decision to kill Dumbledore > was as Steve outlined made at the spur of the moment, it will be > quite difficult to get anyone in the Order to listen. I think that Quick_Silver might have given the answer to this problem: > Quick_Silver > Instead Dumbledore keeps Harry on the Tower under the > cloak to witness what occurs with Draco, the DE's, and Snape. Not so > much for Harry's safety but so that Harry can see what happens > because Harry needs to know. Harry needs to know because of who > Harry is and what Harry must do. Thinking the scene through with a cooler head, Harry ought to see the parallels between himself in the cave and Snape on the tower. And thinking also about the last lesson that Snape gave him on his flight, he ought to realize that Snape is in fact his biggest ally in the fight against Voldemort. I can easily picture DD wanting this to happen. Especially if we consider DD's weakness in realizing how the hatred between Snape and Harry affects any cool reasoning on Harry's part. Claudia (who totally agrees to what Steve, Quick_Silver and Zgirnius have said so far in this thread) From rdoliver30 at yahoo.com Wed Jan 25 18:45:27 2006 From: rdoliver30 at yahoo.com (lupinlore) Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2006 18:45:27 -0000 Subject: Was the eavesdropper unimportant to Harry? WAS: Re: Snape again In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147036 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "justcarol67" wrote: > > Carol, who hopes that Harry will learn to see clearly (and stop > hating) in Book 7 > Now, why on Earth should Harry stop hating? His hate is, IMO, perfectly normal and healthy. It is the expected reaction to attack and loss, as well as child abuse, which IMO Snape most definitely is guilty of. For Harry to stop hating would be, quite simply, pathological. Lupinlore From kmalone1127 at yahoo.com Wed Jan 25 06:05:34 2006 From: kmalone1127 at yahoo.com (kmalone1127) Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2006 06:05:34 -0000 Subject: ESE!Fleur WAS: Re: The Secret Revealed! ESE!Arthur In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147037 I'm, waiting to see who comes up with ESE!Fleur. Amusing as these posts are, I think an evil Fleur would top them all. And as much as I'm joking, it is scary how much one can think of to incriminate her. Based, of course, on nothing but asumptions with no hard canon. Take for example, - Fleur's headmistress is half giant. Fleur is part veela. Who better to teach Fleur of the prejudices of wizards than Madame Maxime. - Fleur was idealy placed in the tournament to aid Crouch Jr. He stunned her so he would get all of the glory. Naturally, she would want another chance to prove herself. - And what better way to do that than getting together with a member of the family that is close to Harry Potter. - And don't think she couldn't "turn on the 'ol juice" to get Bill to tell her what goes on at the meetings. - She is also idealy placed to recruit veela that are not happy with how they are treated and who can use their abilities to befuddle key men of Voldemort's enemies. - On that note, her headmaster is also idealy placed to recruit giants. I won't even go into the supposed shenanigens that happened over the summer with Hagrid. - Also note, when she saw Bill in the hospital wing, she hesitated. Only when Mrs. Weasley said something did she go to him. There are perhaps other examples. One thousand galleons to the best ESE!Fleur conspiracy theory! - kmalone1127 From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Wed Jan 25 19:50:59 2006 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2006 19:50:59 -0000 Subject: Was the eavesdropper unimportant to Harry? WAS: Re: Snape again In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147038 > Carol responds: > Yes, of course. He'd have been *surprised* if it was anyone he knew. > But it's only when Harry knows it's *Snape* that the eavesdropper role > becomes *significant* to him. Alla: I agree with SSSusan and Jenn. I don't doubt that the fact that "eavesdropper" is Snape made Harry hate him more, but I disagree that eavesdropper becomes significant ONLY because it is Snape. IMO eavesdropper becomes significant WHEN he gets a name, ANY name. Of course the fact that his name is Snape, makes Harry more upset for various reasons already described. Carol: SNIP> > If the eavesdropper had been Lucius Malfoy, Harry's reaction would > have been, "I knew it! He's evil!" And then he would have let it go > because it did nothing to change his mental picture fo Draco's father. > If it had been Mundungus Fletcher, he would have said, "That scumbag! > Dumbledore should never have let him into the Order!" But it would not > have been personal. Harry would not have gone ballistic and accused > Dung of *murdering* his parents. He would have remembered that it was > *Voldemort* who killed them and PP who betrayed them. The anger would > have been temporary, as it was when he discovered Dung with goods > stolen from 12 GP, and the eavesdropper role would have retained its > relative insignificance. Alla: That is probably my main disagreement with your argument. We do NOT know how Harry would have reacted if eavesdropper had different name, we only had a chance to see Harry's reaction to Snape. IMO of course For all I know, Harry would have gone just as ballistic if he discovered that eavesdropper was Dung and actually example with stolen goods shows IMO that he would have gone ballistic, because when Harry sees Dung with "stolen glasses" that is much LESSER insults to Sirius' memory than what Snape did by giving prophecy to Voldemort and Harry is still very upset. I submit that eavesdropper became more significant when he got a name, but of course that his name is Snape was an extra insult to Harry. JMO, Alla From sherriola at earthlink.net Wed Jan 25 20:03:04 2006 From: sherriola at earthlink.net (Sherry Gomes) Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2006 12:03:04 -0800 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Was the eavesdropper unimportant to Harry? WAS: Re: Snape again In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <003c01c621ea$5b387b90$0400a8c0@pensive> No: HPFGUIDX 147039 Alla: I agree with SSSusan and Jenn. I don't doubt that the fact that "eavesdropper" is Snape made Harry hate him more, but I disagree that eavesdropper becomes significant ONLY because it is Snape. IMO eavesdropper becomes significant WHEN he gets a name, ANY name. Of course the fact that his name is Snape, makes Harry more upset for various reasons already described. sherry now: I think also that we have to remember what was going on when Harry first learned about the prophecy and that there had been a nameless eavesdropper. Sirius had just been murdered. Harry is in shock. Now he's being told this secret about the prophecy, from a man he had trusted who had ignored him for the entire year. He's enraged, grieving and stunned with the revelations. It seems natural to me, that in those moments, the identity of the eavesdropper didn't register as being too important yet. There was so much to take in. By the time a year has past and he learns the identity of the eavesdropper, I think he would have been furious, no matter who it was. Yes, the fact that it was Snape is even more cause for rage in Harry's mind, but I don't think he would have just blown it off with a shrug, if he'd learned it was Malfoy, Dung or anyone else he knew. I think it's all in the timing. I can understand how in his mind, everyone and everything that led up to the murder of his parents are all to blame. After all, the poor kid still blames himself for Sirius' death, which I steadfastly maintain was in no way his fault. Sherry From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Wed Jan 25 20:11:53 2006 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2006 20:11:53 -0000 Subject: Unicorn blood, Wormtail, and Nagini (Was: ESE!Lupin condensed) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147040 Pippin wrote: > What can kill unicorns is also an "official" mystery. > Wormtail is able to prepare a potion "concocted from unicorn blood" > with no explanation of how a "poor wizard" like Peter would obtain it. Quirrell was able to kill unicorns, supposedly, but Quirrell is now dead, so who is helping Voldemort kill unicorns in GoF? Hagrid said a werewolf couldn't do it, but the unicorns in PS/SS were attacked previous to the night of Harry's detention. "Second time in a week." Hagrid says, "I found one dead last Wednesday." Hagrid knows that a non-wizard werewolf couldn't catch one, and the attacks are too spaced out to have been done at full moon. But he's not thinking about someone casting a spell -- and now we know that there's a spell that causes terrible slashing cuts, and the Marauders knew it. Carol responds: We also know that there's a spell called Avada Kedavra, which can kill a fox, so why not a unicorn? Since Quirrell drank the unicorn blood to keep LV alive, there's (IMO) no reason not to suspect him of killing the unicorns in SS/PS, especially with LV in his head giving him the necessary power and will to do it if he lacked it himself. Lupin is nowhere around. I don't see any unsolved mystery here. As for PP, he, too, can evidently cast an AK, "screeching it into the night," resulting in the death of Cedric Diggory. But since you don't believe that he did so, let's look at other evidence. PP can certainly concoct a complex potion involving TR Sr.'s bone, Harry's blood, and his own cut-off hand. Harry witnesses him doing so, and we later see him lovingly caressing his silver hand. Lupin has no part in making the restorative potion; it's all Pettigrew's doing. That being the case, why would PP be unable to concoct a potion involving Nagini's venom (which he obtains by "milking" her) and unicorn blood, which he could obtain by killing a single unicorn (with a spell revealed to him by LV if an ordinary AK won't work)? He needs the unicorn blood only once, for the potion to create LV's fetal body. IIRC, LV's life (or half-life) is sustained after that by Nagini's venom alone, not by additional doses of unicorn blood, so PP would need to kill or injure only a single unicorn, not repeatedly go unicorn hunting (or depend on ESE!Lupin to do so for him). No need for ESE!Lupin anywhere in this scenario--only for a Wormtail who, motivated by fear and self-preservation, is more competent than LV and others normally give him credit for being, who under duress can overcome his laziness to concoct restorative potions, repeatedly milk a highly poisonous magical viper, and kill a single unicorn for its blood. Carol, who thinks that Nagini's relationship with LV, not Wormtail's half-hearted and self-debasing servitude, is the unresolved mystery here From exodusts at yahoo.com Wed Jan 25 08:59:30 2006 From: exodusts at yahoo.com (exodusts) Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2006 08:59:30 -0000 Subject: Thestrals be the key In-Reply-To: <1287135119.20060124132853@web.de> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147041 Caro wrote: > > I lost track to the discussion, but I think it hasn't been mentioned > yet, that the thestrals may be a way for Harry to get hold of the > horcruxes left. They can find any Place, even if you Don't know where > it is. You might need to know the name of the place, though, which would limit their usefulness in the search for Horcruz objects. In GoF, Hagrid says this in the Thestral lesson (before being interrupted): 'Er . . . yeah . . . good stuff abou' Thestrals. Well, once they're tamed, like this lot, yeh'll never be lost again. 'Mazin' sense o' direction, jus' tell 'em where yeh want ter go - ' Later, Luna: 'Hagrid says they're very good at finding places their riders are looking for.' Harry to his Thestral: 'Ministry of Magic, visitors' entrance, London, then,' he said uncertainly. 'Er . . . if you know . . . where to go . . .' exodusts. From quick_silver71 at yahoo.ca Wed Jan 25 20:26:36 2006 From: quick_silver71 at yahoo.ca (quick_silver71) Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2006 20:26:36 -0000 Subject: Do any list members think Dumbledore might have asked Snape to kill him? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147042 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "cubfanbudwoman" wrote: > SSSusan: > I'm a little puzzled by this. NOT that I disagree with you that DD > wanted Harry to witness the scene but with the notion that there WAS > time/opportunity to have sent Harry to safety or through the school. > > I just finished a re-read a couple of nights ago, and so I'm pretty > sure that there wasn't time AT ALL. DD tells Harry to go -- to go > and get Snape, not Madam Pomfrey -- and Harry turns to do so, but > before he can leave, Draco bursts through the door. JUST before > Draco uses expelliarmus to disarm DD, DD freezes Harry under his > cloak. > > So, I guess I disagree that DD **opted** not to send Harry to safety > or on a mission in the castle and instead chose to have Harry stay > and learn a lesson. Harry *was* going to set off to get Snape but > there wasn't time to leave the tower before Draco arrived. So DD > made, imo, a SNAP decision to freeze Harry. It wasn't a long- thought- > out decision that it was MORE important for Harry to stay and see > what developed with Draco than it was to send Harry to safety or to > wait for the DEs. > > Maybe I'm misunderstanding what you're saying, but when I read this, > it sounded as if you felt DD had adequate TIME to choose among those > three options (sending Harry somewhere safe, sending him to wait for > the DEs, or having him stay on the tower to witness the Draco scene > as it unfolded). IMO, he did NOT have time to choose among those and > only chose to freeze Harry there when he realized Harry was not going > to get the opportunity to go get Snape's help. > > Siriusly Snapey Susan, apologizing if she's missing the point here. > Darn your right, sorry about that, I wasn't remembering it rightly. Although Dumbledore did have several seconds and their flight up to the Tower to ponder what was going on. Harry also questions Dumbledore's orders on top of the Tower so there is a small time delay. The fact that Dumbledore doesn't tell Harry to flee or prepare to fight when footsteps are heard and the fact that he freezes Harry makes me think that Dumbledore knows who is coming up the stairs at least and that Dumbledore does have a plan to deal with that person. Still at this part of Dumbledore's decisions must have been time constrained. Quick_Silver From quick_silver71 at yahoo.ca Wed Jan 25 20:31:10 2006 From: quick_silver71 at yahoo.ca (quick_silver71) Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2006 20:31:10 -0000 Subject: Why DADA for Snape? (WAS Re: Do any list members think...) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147043 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Claudia" wrote: > > Quick_Silver > > Instead Dumbledore keeps Harry on the Tower under the > > cloak to witness what occurs with Draco, the DE's, and Snape. Not so > > much for Harry's safety but so that Harry can see what happens > > because Harry needs to know. Harry needs to know because of who > > Harry is and what Harry must do. > > > Thinking the scene through with a cooler head, Harry ought to see the > parallels between himself in the cave and Snape on the tower. And > thinking also about the last lesson that Snape gave him on his > flight, he ought to realize that Snape is in fact his biggest ally in > the fight against Voldemort. > > I can easily picture DD wanting this to happen. Especially if we > consider DD's weakness in realizing how the hatred between Snape and > Harry affects any cool reasoning on Harry's part. > > Claudia (who totally agrees to what Steve, Quick_Silver and Zgirnius > have said so far in this thread) > Actually I wasn't refering so much to Harry making a parallel with Snape as with the concept that knowledge is power. Harry now has knowledge from the Tower, i.e. that Draco isn't not a killer and doesn't want to be a DE, that he can porbably put to good use. Quick_Silver (who dislikes the Cave vs Tower parallel for some reason) From parisfan_ca at yahoo.com Wed Jan 25 20:26:39 2006 From: parisfan_ca at yahoo.com (laurie goudge) Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2006 12:26:39 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Why Tom left Merope In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20060125202639.19763.qmail@web30704.mail.mud.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 147044 --- quigonginger wrote: > Given the emphasis on maintaining the Slytherin > line, I'm sure > Marvolo had intentions of mating the last 2 > remaining heirs of > Slytherin to produce more heirs. (OK, maybe "sure" > is a but much, > but I'd put a few galleons on it.) > laurie writes I am kinda thinking that if these are the sole heirs of syltherin that doing the nasty with your VERY next of kin to continue the family is (even very nasty to consider) the only way to go ginger futher writes: > If we look at her as a desperate person fated to a > life of matrimony > with Morfin, living under her father's roof for the > rest of her life, > who now has a brief window of opportunity for > escape, I think she > becomes more understandable. Of course, there's no > way Tom would > have fallen for her, but we homely inbred chicks > have to dream too, > don't we? (Don't worry- I just dream, I'm not > concocting > potions...yet) laurie adds: I do agree with you ginger. Her only way to get out of that hell hole was to more or less induce someone to take her. From all accounts Merope is NOT the most attractive chick on the block and last I here she didn't have any suitors come calling and if she did, how may would have daddy considered? so the onlly way out is to go out and snare herself a MAN and do it in which ever way works. And it may as well be the local, village hunk! laurie __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com From exodusts at yahoo.com Wed Jan 25 08:50:36 2006 From: exodusts at yahoo.com (exodusts) Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2006 08:50:36 -0000 Subject: Slughorn -- DE or not? (was Re: When will the ministry start kicking butt and taking names?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147045 Susanbones2003 wrote: > > Hi there again, > I just wanted to make my point with book in hand. Regarding the fake > attack on Slughorn's house: > > "My dear Horace," said Dumbledore, looking amused, "if the Death > Eaters had really come to call, the Dark Mark would have been set > over the house." > The wizard clapped a pudgy hand to his vast forehead. > " The Dark Mark," he muttered. "Knew thre was something ...ah > well. Wouldn't have had time anyway. I'd only just put the finishing > touches to my upholstery when you entered the room." > p. 64, Scholastic Books ed. > > Now that's not as good as casting the mark but it is sufficiently > ambiguous to make me question his loyalties. I do not think there is anything in canon that categorically states that only Death Eaters know, or can cast, the Dark Mark spell. Re- reading the chapter entitled "The Dark Mark" in GoF suggests that "precious few wizards" know it, but that is all. Slughorn knew about Horcruxes, but that doesn't necessarily mean he is a Death Eater either. It might just mean he is a shady character, who knows a bit about the Dark Arts. His drunken remorse in HBP, inspired by Harry's eyes resembling Lily's, seems sincere. It might also explain this quote from J.K. in 1999: "Yes. I've even drawn a picture of how they look. Harry has his father and mother's good looks. But he has his mother's eyes and that's very important in a future book." exodusts. From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Wed Jan 25 20:54:02 2006 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2006 20:54:02 -0000 Subject: Tom Riddle Sr. (Was: Why Tom left Merope) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147046 Carol earlier: > > Maybe I'm just old-fashioned, but I have difficulty conceiving of the seduction of a man by a woman as rape. The sex wasn't forced. He had to have wanted it or it could not have happened. > RP responded: > IMO what Merope did to Tom Sr was not significantly different from men putting women on rape drugs (like R2) and have sex with them while they were under the drug's influence. Merope did NOT just "seduce" Tom- you described how unattractive she was yourself-so what qualities of hers drew Tom to WILLINGLY have sex with her? > I have sympathy for Merope for who she was, she *was* abused by both > her father and her brother. But what she did was still inexcusable, > and I totally do not believe Tom Sr did anything unreasonable by > ditching her, pregnant or not. I pity Tom even more to have not even > the option of abortion! > > Also, my idea of *loving* someone is to treat that person with > kindness, NOT to abuse/manipulate them. So while Merope gets my > sympathy for being born/raised into thinking to love someone is to > rape them using drug, Tom Sr was totally faultless in my book for > not taking this "love" into consideration when he chose to leave- he > was the *victim* of this "love", after all. Carol again: I was thinking of rape in terms of a brutal, forced sexual act that hurts the woman physically as well as emotionally, not in terms of drug-induced date rape, which I admit is somewhat analogous to a love potion used to trick a man into marriage. But Tom Sr., under the potions's influence, believed that Merope was beautiful, believed that he loved her. (See Ron's belief that Romilda Vane was beautiful and desorable for evidence of Tom Sr.'s mental state.) A man has to be aroused to have sex with a woman; that's a biological fact I was modestly avoiding in previous posts in this thread. Tom was deluded, certainly, but he was not being forced to do something he didn't want to do (*at that time* and under the influence of the potion). His indignation afterwards is not because he was forced to have sex against his will but because he was tricked--robbed, essentially, of his chance for a marriage with the beautiful Cecilia, who is from the right social class and in all respects a suitable bride for the heir of the local gentry (wrong word; I can't think of the proper British term). It's rather as if young Lucius Malfoy had been tricked into marrying Eileen Prince, or someone even uglier (his generation's Millicent Bulstrode, maybe, only she'd have to be a "mudblood" to make her sufficiently repulsive to him, and had no way out except to return to his parents). It's the *marriage*, IMO, that's the problem for Tom Sr. He can't dissolve it because the grounds for dissolution--that his wife is a witch who tricked him into marrying him by giving him a love potion--won't be believed by any Muggle authority. So he goes home to live with his parents, not even putting a tail on Merope to find out what happens to her and his unborn child. (Or maybe the orphanage informed him of her death, but he didn't want to acknowledge his infant son for fear that he'd be like his mother?) At any rate, let's say that the date rape analogy is accurate. Would a woman in this situation, especially a rich woman who could afford to acknowledge and care for her child, be justified in dumping her unwanted infant in an orphanage where he would be at best fed and clothed but unloved? In fact, Tom has no way of knowing that his child will even be placed in an orphanage. Given Merope's despair and helplessness and lack of resources, she could easily end up dead by the side of the road before the child is even born. Why is it acceptable for Tom Sr. to refuse to acknowledge an innocent child just because its mother deceived him? If a *woman* is the victim of a brutal rape involving force rather than a sedative that alters her mental state, she's still expected to find someone to care for the child, not abandon it. Should a man, for whom brutality is not even involved, have any less responsibility for his own offspring, however unwillingly conceived? And Tom Sr. is also abandoning a helpless pregnant woman who has no means of caring for herself. Yes, she tricked him. But does that justify his leaving a half-mad, desperate, uneducated woman, with no prospects of a job or another marriage, to fend for herself and her unborn child? A good man, a decent man, would have provided for her and her child, even if he considered himself her victim, because her plight was far worse than his. And the child's fate depended on hers. Carol, who does not think Tom Sr. deserved to be murdered but does not consider his behavior justified, rape victim or no From katmac at katmac.cncdsl.com Wed Jan 25 20:54:41 2006 From: katmac at katmac.cncdsl.com (lagattalucianese) Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2006 20:54:41 -0000 Subject: Thestrals be the key In-Reply-To: <1287135119.20060124132853@web.de> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147047 > > I lost track to the discussion, but I think it hasn't been mentioned > yet, that the thestrals may be a way for Harry to get hold of the > horcruxes left. They can find any Place, even if you Don't know where > it is. > > Yours Caro > La Gatta Lucianese: Or owls! Harry could just tell Hedwig, "Go find me those horcruxes!" From exodusts at yahoo.com Wed Jan 25 13:05:53 2006 From: exodusts at yahoo.com (exodusts) Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2006 13:05:53 -0000 Subject: A Fine Revenge? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147048 A nice theory about the source of a minor character name: Augustus / Algernon Rookwood, Death Eater and Traitor. I found an old article on the BBC News website, dated Wednesday, 29 March, 2000: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/education/693779.stm School bans Harry Potter A primary school head teacher is banning pupils from reading the best- selling Harry Potter children's books because she says they go against the Bible's teachings. Carol Rookwood, head of St Mary's Island Church of England Aided School in Chatham, Kent, says the nature of the stories does not fit in with the school's "church ethos". Is it a coincidence J.K. was finishing GoF that year, and a Death Eater appears with the surname Rookwood, which is pretty unusual? exodusts From briandumby at yahoo.com Wed Jan 25 19:57:12 2006 From: briandumby at yahoo.com (brian dumby) Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2006 11:57:12 -0800 (PST) Subject: ESE!Lupin condensed In-Reply-To: <1137882252.2356.40984.m26@yahoogroups.com> Message-ID: <20060125195712.26713.qmail@web35903.mail.mud.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 147049 Considering the ESE!Lupin story and the who's WORMTAIL angle.. doesn't the marauders map say "Ms Moony Wormtail Padfoot and Prongs" .. This probably means there was one Wormtail and other 3 were aware of that.. assuming that the map was made by all 4. Ideas? BD From belviso at attglobal.net Wed Jan 25 21:18:02 2006 From: belviso at attglobal.net (sistermagpie) Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2006 21:18:02 -0000 Subject: Tom Riddle Sr. (Was: Why Tom left Merope) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147050 > Carol again: > His indignation afterwards is not because he was forced to have sex > against his will but because he was tricked--robbed, essentially, of > his chance for a marriage with the beautiful Cecilia, who is from the > right social class and in all respects a suitable bride for the heir > of the local gentry (wrong word; I can't think of the proper British > term). It's rather as if young Lucius Malfoy had been tricked into > marrying Eileen Prince, or someone even uglier (his generation's > Millicent Bulstrode, maybe, only she'd have to be a "mudblood" to make > her sufficiently repulsive to him, and had no way out except to return > to his parents). Magpie: I still think this is unfair to Tom Sr. It seems like a classic case of putting the victim on trial. It's nobody's business who Tom wants to marry, and who says the only good thing about Celia was that she was the correct class? He's a Muggle with a right to lead his own life and marry whomever he wants. A random witch doses him with a love potion and forces him, through mind control, to throw over the person he was with by choice and have sex with her and marry her. I don't see how the date rape analogy isn't accurate. JKR is turning the usual situation on its head. If they were Muggles we'd assume Tom had seduced poor hapless Merope and left her. But since she's the witch he's the victim in the situation. Carol: Given Merope's despair and > helplessness and lack of resources, she could easily end up dead by > the side of the road before the child is even born. Magpie: There's no reason Tom had to see it that way--he was in despair and helpless. Why would he see the person who kept him a slave for a year as such? Why assume he was thinking clearly himself? He never had much of a life again either. Why assume Merope was the traumatized one? It's like that old SNL sketch with the rape hotline for men--because sometimes after a man commits a rape he's upset and needs someone to talk to! Carol: > > Why is it acceptable for Tom Sr. to refuse to acknowledge an innocent > child just because its mother deceived him? If a *woman* is the victim > of a brutal rape involving force rather than a sedative that alters > her mental state, she's still expected to find someone to care for the > child, not abandon it. Magpie: The child did have care a woman in that situation would be expected to give. Tom leaves the child with a living mother (who can do magic). Tom Jr. later goes to an orphanage whose job it is to care for children in just that sort of situation. Both of those things would be considered finding someone to care for the child. I agree it's certainly not fair to Tom Jr., the innocent, but plenty of people would find it impossible to love a child in that situation. If Tom conceived the child under a love spell he'd have even more reason to feel disconnected to it. Carol: Yes, she > tricked him. But does that justify his leaving a half-mad, desperate, > uneducated woman, with no prospects of a job or another marriage, to > fend for herself and her unborn child? Magpie: Yes, it does justify his leaving *her* since he never wanted to be with her to begin with. She can do MAGIC. She's *not* helpless except when she gives up on herself. Would a good man care for the *child* regardless? And perhaps offer some care to the mother because she is the child's mother? Yes, he probably would. That would be the correct thing to do. But I can't understand why a Muggle held captive by a witch who manipulated his life is now expected to find her a job or a good husband. I think a natural response would be to have Merope thrown in jail, since she committed a crime. I do think a good person would provide for the child involved, but people have rejected children for a lot less. Tom Sr. seems to be being held up to a pretty high standard here, while Merope's actual crime is trivialized because she was lonely and Tom Sr. was rich and arrogant. -m From katmac at katmac.cncdsl.com Wed Jan 25 21:18:30 2006 From: katmac at katmac.cncdsl.com (lagattalucianese) Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2006 21:18:30 -0000 Subject: Was the eavesdropper unimportant to Harry? WAS: Re: Snape again In-Reply-To: <002301c621c8$5e4ae420$b301010a@ConsolidatedTelephone.local> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147051 > > kchuplis: > > ...Fudge is scared STIFF of > anything irregular and never shows a particular bit of brilliance. > He's the guy who always plays it safe.... > La Gatta Lucianese: Think Neville Chamberlain and "Peace in Our Time". From juli17 at aol.com Wed Jan 25 21:21:04 2006 From: juli17 at aol.com (juli17 at aol.com) Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2006 16:21:04 -0500 Subject: Was the eavesdropper unimportant to Harry? WAS: Re: Snape again In-Reply-To: <1138221172.2381.39791.m33@yahoogroups.com> References: <1138221172.2381.39791.m33@yahoogroups.com> Message-ID: <8C7F00C6258D139-A88-5187@FWM-M39.sysops.aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 147052 Alla: That is probably my main disagreement with your argument. We do NOT know how Harry would have reacted if eavesdropper had different name, we only had a chance to see Harry's reaction to Snape. IMO of course For all I know, Harry would have gone just as ballistic if he discovered that eavesdropper was Dung and actually example with stolen goods shows IMO that he would have gone ballistic, because when Harry sees Dung with "stolen glasses" that is much LESSER insults to Sirius' memory than what Snape did by giving prophecy to Voldemort and Harry is still very upset. I submit that eavesdropper became more significant when he got a name, but of course that his name is Snape was an extra insult to Harry. Julie: I submit that the eavesdropper became more significant when he got a name, but when that name was Snape, the eavesdropper took on a blame *out of proportion* to his actual blame in the death's of Lily and James Potter. This wouldn't have happened if the name had been Lucius Malfoy or Mundungus. Harry would have still been angry but he would have seen their responsibility in correct proportion-- i.e., they did something wrong and even evil, but it was Voldemort (and also Peter) who primarily got James and Lily killed. When it's Snape, in Harry's mind it becomes Snape who primarily got James and Lily killed. Because of Harry's existent hatred and mistrust of Snape, he assigns Snape blame out of proportion with his actual crime. That to me is the difference when it comes to Snape, as opposed to others. Harry assigns him more blame than he actually bears for his crimes (same thing with the death of Sirius). It's natural, but it also is not rational. And while Harry's emotions are important in defeating Voldemort, if his emotions keep him from evaluating events accurately, that can only hurt him. IMO. Julie [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From Nanagose at aol.com Wed Jan 25 21:25:10 2006 From: Nanagose at aol.com (spotsgal) Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2006 21:25:10 -0000 Subject: ESE!Lupin condensed and Lupin and Sirius replies In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147053 >> Olivier: >> He could have let Harry throw himself through the veil (JKR insists >> numerous times that Harry fights "viciously" and "with every bit of >> strength" against Lupin and that Lupin later maintains a >> "precautionary grip" on Harry). > Pippin: > If Lupin knows and believes the entire prophecy, he knows that the > Veil will not kill the Chosen One. Christina: Why not? JKR seems to have backed down from the strict interpretation of the prophecy implied in OotP, saying that the entire thing could be nullified if Harry and Voldemort just walked away. So while I think that the prophecy will play itself out in the end, the prophecy can't be "tested" because it isn't strictly binding (not in the way that Sirius's will bound Kreacher to Harry, which was something that *could* be tested). On top of that, I assume you're talking about the "either must die at the hand of the other" line. That can be interpreted very strictly, as I believe you are doing here, or very loosely. The dictionary definition of "at the hand of" is "by or through the action (or agency) of." So if a member of Voldemort's organization, acting in his interest, kills Harry, is this a fulfillment of the prophecy? If Voldemort orders somebody to kill Harry, is this a fulfillment of the prophecy? If Voldemort and Harry are dueling, and Harry trips and falls into the veil, is this a fulfillment of the prophecy? We don't know how strictly JKR meant for this line to be interpreted, but there's certainly enough leeway to say that these scenarios could be possible ways to fulfill the prophecy. If Voldemort is the only person that can kill Harry, then I think that cheapens and nullifies a lot of the trials Harry has faced so far. With the strict interpretation that you are suggesting (nothing can physically kill Harry except for Voldemort), Harry couldn't have been killed by Sirius Black or BCJ (or any other Death Eater). > Pippin: > So if Harry is killed by it, he's not the Chosen One, and his death > would be pointless. Christina: OK, let's assume you are correct, and Harry, as the Chosen One, can't die by running into the veil. Finding out that Harry is *not* the Chosen One via his death through the veil has a HUGE point, and is very useful. It would prove to Voldemort that Harry is *not* the threat he should be focussing on. Rather, there is somebody else out there, the true "Chosen One," that Voldemort must track down and extinguish. Very powerful information. If Harry tries to go through the veil and can't, then Voldemort has 100% confirmation that Harry is the Chosen One. > Pippin > Anyway, he hasn't got anything against Harry personally, he just > wants Voldemort victorious over the Ministry (IMO). Christina: And the death of Harry would be the death of the a great threat to Voldemort's regime. Voldemort could quit spending valuable time, energy, and manpower trying to kill the poor kid, and begin his true reign of power. If Lupin wants Voldemort victorious (over anybody), then Harry is an obstacle that must be removed. So Lupin has a very good reason to let Harry die. > Pippin: > Lupin clearly didn't want or expect Dumbledore to die -- I believe > he thought Dumbledore was so powerful that nothing could harm him. Christina: Dumbledore is also huge obstacle in Voldemort's desire to take over the WW. If Dumbledore is so powerful that nothing can harm him, then Voldemort will never be free to truly emerge victorious. Lupin would be supporting, in his own opinion, a futile cause. Christina From rdoliver30 at yahoo.com Wed Jan 25 20:37:58 2006 From: rdoliver30 at yahoo.com (lupinlore) Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2006 20:37:58 -0000 Subject: Was the eavesdropper unimportant to Harry? WAS: Re: Snape again In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147054 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "justcarol67" wrote: And yet, setting aside the death of Dumbledore (which has yet to > be fully explained), Wormtail's sins against Harry are much greater > than Snape's. > Well, that is setting aside a lot. But I disagree that even a DDM! Snape has sinned less against Harry than has Wormtail. He was at least as responsible for the Potter's deaths as Peter was. And his methodical abuse of Harry over six years is reprehensible beyond belief, at least equal to Peter's other sins. Lupinlore From horridporrid03 at yahoo.com Wed Jan 25 22:18:39 2006 From: horridporrid03 at yahoo.com (horridporrid03) Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2006 22:18:39 -0000 Subject: Merope's "utter selfishness"? (was: Why Tom left Merope) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147055 > >>Betsy Hp: > > > > Then, in an act of utter selfishness, she couldn't even > > be bothered to try and stick around for her son. Huh. Maybe > > I'm not all that sympathetic after all. > >>SSSusan: > Ooooh, you had me ALL the way to here, Betsy. Even right up to > Merope having never had a toy before, she broke this one. ;-) > > But to call what she did at the orphanage "an act of utter > selfishness"? I can't go that far. She had been left by Tom, she > was flat broke, she had no family she could turn to for help, and > no assets left. Did you not feel despair in what she did? > desperation? depression? (Hmmm -- a different 3 Ds from the 3 Ds > we get introduced to with apparition lessons.) I do think Merope > was despondent, desperate and depressed, and to me that's enough > to remove the label "utter selfishness" from the action she took. > Without context I'd call it that, but with the context, I cut her > some slack for seeing no way out. Betsy Hp: Hmm, I agree I was being a bit harsh on Merope for dying. As you point out, I wasn't really considering Merope's state of mind. I think she was hit with a blow that she couldn't bounce back from when she released Tom from her control. One that even the prospect of a child couldn't overcome. I think Merope realized that she had become as bad, if not worse, than her father. When Merope released Tom from the Imperius curse or took him off the love potion or whatever, Dumbledore thinks that she was expecting or at least hoping that Tom would retain some sort of love for her. And of course, he doesn't. It wouldn't surprise me if his reaction helped her realize how badly she'd treated him. The fact that she had her baby at a Muggle facility instead of St. Mungos suggests that Merope may have *chosen* to give up on magic. Perhaps, horrified by what she had done, Merope felt that she couldn't be trusted with that sort of power, couldn't be trusted with a baby, and maybe even felt like she didn't deserve to live. Depression, despondency and desperation, indeed. Betsy Hp From amiabledorsai at yahoo.com Wed Jan 25 22:53:40 2006 From: amiabledorsai at yahoo.com (amiabledorsai) Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2006 22:53:40 -0000 Subject: Was the eavesdropper unimportant to Harry? WAS: Re: Snape again In-Reply-To: <002301c621c8$5e4ae420$b301010a@ConsolidatedTelephone.local> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147056 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Karen" wrote: > From: amiabledorsai > More than that, he poisons Fudge's mind against the testimony > of The Trio by convincing him that their belief in Sirius's > innocence is the result of their being confunded... > ...Snape planted the seed of doubt that Rita Skeeter so > lavishly fertilised, and that bloomed into Fudge's > conclusion that Harry was a dangerous braggart. > > None of this has escaped Harry's attention, I'm sure. > kchuplis: >...Fudge is scared STIFF of anything irregular and > never shows a particular bit of brilliance. He's the > guy who always plays it safe. I think it would have been > that he believed the kids were hoodwinked no matter what, > even if Snape wasn't there freaking out. I just don't think > it is in Fudge's nature (and this was born out in > the following books) to accept things that seem to unusual. > If it isn't in his comfort zone, he will find a way to explain it. > ONce his ways of explaining it get unreasonably absurd he might > be in a frame of mind to accept something else, but until > then, I think he would supply these explanations on his own > without out any help from meltdown!Snape. Amiable Dorsai: You may think so, and you may be right. The question is: what does Harry think? Harry knows that Snape told Fudge that he, Ron and Hermione were Confunded. Harry knows that Fudge subsequently ignored their stories. What do you suppose Harry thinks? Amiable Dorsai From horridporrid03 at yahoo.com Wed Jan 25 23:25:19 2006 From: horridporrid03 at yahoo.com (horridporrid03) Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2006 23:25:19 -0000 Subject: Draco and Harry (was:The GoF Train Scene - and beyond...) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147057 > >>Betsy Hp: > > > > I mean, yes Draco is prejudiced (as he's been raised to be, > > never exposed to another way of thinking), but again, Harry's > > conversation with Ron is not all that different from Draco's > > conversation with Harry. > >>Gerry: > So? Harry is curious. He is interested about his fascinating new > world. He has gotten snippets from the conversation with Draco and > now tries to find out more from a source he likes. Harry wants to > know about his world. That to me is very different about a > conversation that is drenched with prejudice like Draco has. Betsy Hp: I guess I'm not seeing Draco's conversation as "drenched with prejudice". And I can see that if Harry had asked Draco the questions he'd asked Ron, Draco would have responded in a friendly manner. I'm not saying there wasn't any prejudice expressed by Draco. He's far more interested in the "right sort" than Ron. But that's not what turns Harry off. Draco bothers him because Draco assumes a certain level of knowledge on Harry's part (Quidditch, school houses, etc.) and Harry is afraid of looking stupid. > >>Betsy Hp: > > But Draco doesn't insult Lily on purpose. That's where the > > misspeaking comes in, I think. > > > >>Gerry: > Yes he does. He gives his opinion about the 'other kind,' and he > does so quite openly under the mistaken assumption he is talking > to another pureblood. > Betsy Hp: *Exactly*. Draco assumes a certain level of knowledge. He doesn't *deliberately* set out to insult Harry's mother. (Heck, I don't think Harry even realizes his mother has been insulted.) So Draco hasn't set out to be hostile to this new boy he's just met. Draco is trying to be friendly, but he puts his foot in it. *IF* Draco had known that this was Harry Potter he was speaking to, I'm sure he wouldn't have set out to insult Harry's mom. He'd have asked different sorts of questions. > >>Gerry: > That Draco does not know that the boy's mum is the 'wrong kind' > does not really matter to me. > Betsy Hp: Well, no it wouldn't matter to the reader would it. I mean, JKR also uses Draco to introduce a fly in the WW ointment here, doesn't she. So the fact that there are a "right sort" and "wrong sort" in the WW is the main point the reader can take from this conversation. However, there is a certain significance, at least IMO, in the fact that Draco doesn't *knowingly* insult Harry or his mother. After all, JKR could have easily had Draco say something like "You're Harry Potter? Your mother shouldn't have been allowed at Hogwarts," and still gotten her point across. That she doesn't do it that way suggests there's more going on here, I think. > >>Gerry > I'm sorry but I could not disagree more. Yes, Draco makes Harry > insecure. But that is not why he does not like him. It is the way > Draco talks, the way he complains about not being allowed a racing > broom, that all makes it clear this is one spoiled little brat. Betsy Hp: And the fascinating thing is, Draco isn't a spoiled brat. He's not anywhere *near* as spoiled as Dudley. Draco *doesn't* get his broom, and his father *doesn't* think he walks on water. (Narcissa is a bit more doting, but I don't think she's near the level of Petunia either.) But that's what I meant by confidence. I've a sister who's highly confident and would, in Draco's situation, have certainly made vocal plans for "bullying" for a broom. She wouldn't have got one, but she'd have tried and she'd have been highly expectent of success right up to the moment of failure. She was not (none of us were) spoiled by any means. But Harry, who's coming from a *very* dysfunctional background, misjudges the family dynamics. So, he's put off by the fact that Draco is confident of his parents' love and he's put off by the fact that Draco knows more about the WW than he does. (Hence his relief about being able to name Hagrid.) The old misunderstanding cliche rears its hoary head . The prejudice *is* there. I don't want to overlook it, and I think it's important that it get introduced. But the *way* JKR introduced it suggested (to me anyway) that there was more to Draco than "Dudley: the wizard version". > >>Betsy Hp: > > > > Draco and Dudley have very little in common. > >>Gerry: > Actually, they have a lot in common. Both are bullies utterly > spoiled by doting parents. Both want power, and both like to pick > on people they consider inferiour. Betsy Hp: Well, Draco is a bit of a verbal bully. Which is *so* not Dudley. At all. Draco's parents love him but he's certainly not spoiled (see above). Again, so, so, so not Dudley. Erm... they are both blond, and um... male. Harry dislikes both of them, though he can squash Dudley like a bug now, as he realizes. Draco's a bit more of a challenge. So I'm not sure that really counts as something in common. So that's two things in common: blond and male, and ooh! they're around the same age. So that's three! Power: Dudley wants it, but Draco kind of has it already. I mean, Draco's a prefect, that's pretty much it for a schoolboy. Draco is quite interested in glory (though that may have spoiled on him by the end of HBP) but I've not seen any signs of similar desires in Dudley. (Vernon seems more proud of his boxing achievments than Dudley.) Picking on inferiors: Dudley does love to take down the very tiny. (Fourteen beating on eleven is pretty pathetic, IMO.) Draco likes to take down his rivals, whom he automatically classifies as "inferior". (Of course Hermione tells Harry and Ron that Draco is "not worth it" so there are similar classifications going on with the good guys too. Bit of human nature there, I think.) But I don't recall Draco specifically culling out the weak to terrorize. Neville comes the closest, but he's a peer in age and station. And Draco took on Neville one on one, IIRC. Draco was certainly mean to Neville, but he didn't take the same course of action Dudley would have. Betsy Hp From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Thu Jan 26 00:19:20 2006 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2006 00:19:20 -0000 Subject: Was the eavesdropper unimportant to Harry? WAS: Re: Snape again In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147059 SSSusan earlier: > > Much seems to be being made of Harry's not pursuing > > information on the eavesdropper when he first learned of his > > existence... but to me it makes sense that he *didn't* pursue > > it. DD did not identify the person by name, and I've always > > assumed that Harry assumed that this meant it *wasn't anyone he > > knew*. Perhaps not very smart of Harry to make that assumption, > > but doesn't it make sense that he did? He probably figured if > > the eavesdropper was someone he knew or someone "important to > > the story," that DD would TELL him the name. He didn't, so > > Harry didn't ask. Carol responded: > Exactly. The eavesdropper was "not important to the story." Not > significantly guilty, not a criminal on the level of the betrayer > (PP), not guilty of the murders of the Potters. Only an informer > doing his job for LV. If Harry had thought he was important, he > would have demanded to know his identity. > > My point is that, to Harry, the unknown eavesdropper was *not* a > criminal equal in importance to Voldemort himself or to his > parents' betrayer, or Harry would have demanded to know his > identity (which DD obviously knew). SSSusan again: Well... that's actually not what I meant. ;-) The point I was trying to make was that: 1) I agreed w/ Jen that Harry may have been overwhelmed enough in that moment with information that the identity of "an eavesdropper" didn't strike him as something he just HAD to know; and, even more importantly, 2) that I see his not asking for the name as indicative of how much Harry trusted DD. *I* think that Harry believed DD would tell him if he needed to know the identity... and that because he trusted DD, when DD did *not* tell him, he then assumed the identity wasn't important. Later, when it came to light who the eavesdropper was, Harry probably did a major double-take. "WHAT?? It was SNAPE? And Dumbledore didn't think it was IMPORTANT for me to know that?!?" See, I think it was all about trust there, not about how "important" or "unimportant" Harry personally felt the role of the eavesdropper was. I think you're talking about the *role* of the eavesdropper being relatively unimportant, whereas I was talking about the perceived importance of the *identity* of the eavesdropper for Harry, based upon an assumption that if it WERE important, DD would have told it to him. So I don't think that Harry *necessarily* believed the role of eavesdropper was unimportant, but that he figured, when DD didn't stress the *identity* of the person, that Harry then trusted that it was something he should let go because it was somehow not relevant/important in DD's mind. I think that was a long way of saying that, in my view, it was primarily about TRUST of DD for Harry -- that he let the subject drop in part because DD didn't stress it. So, while you may well believe that the role of the eavesdropper is less significant than the betrayer or the murderer, I'm not saying that myself. I think it played a KEY role in the unfolding of the events at GH. There still needed to be a betrayer and a murderer for thingss to come to fruition, and of course I put the *most* importance on the murderer himself, but I would not discount the importance of having gotten the whole ball rolling with the eavesdropper. Y'all know I'm a DDM!Snaper, and so I do believe that Snape did *something* to try to make up for his terrible faux pas [visit Inish Alley for a reference to DRIBBLE SHADOWS as one possibility], and so I think Harry overestimates the evilness of Snape, but I do not diminish the role Snape played in the murders at GH. OTOH, I think *DD* diminished that role, which was part of the reason he did not tell Harry that Snape was the one. I think DD believed he *had* to keep this information from Harry because his goal was for the two of them to eventually trust one another enough to work together, and he may have feared that what would happen if he told Harry it was Snape was exactly what did happen when Harry found out! Carol: > It's only Snape, whom Harry is determined to hate, for whom the > eavesdropper role is given exaggerated significance, greater than > that of the betrayer Pettigrew, who now seems to be forgotten, > despite the fact that he restored Voldemort's body and killed > Cedric Diggory. We don't hear Harry saying, "If I meet Wormtail, > so much the worse for him!" And yet, setting aside the death of > Dumbledore (which has yet to be fully explained), Wormtail's sins > against Harry are much greater than Snape's. SSSusan: Wormtail's sins may be much greater than Snape's in fact, but Wormtail's sins may NOT be much greater than Snape's **in Harry's perception.** And, frankly, it's what's in Harry's perception that matters in this story. I'll acknowledge that Harry does not speak much about Pettigrew, and that is a little surprising. He *should* hate him greatly, for his role in his parents' deaths and for his assistance in bringing Voldy back to human form. I personally think part of that is that PP's not someone Harry SEES regularly, as he SEES and has to deal with Snape regularly. (Like something I mentioned in my previous post, that Voldy has, 'til now, been harder for Harry to understand and imagine, since there has been so little one-on-one interaction between them.) BUT I also think there is another explanation for why Harry says, "If I meet Snape, so much the worse for him!" as opposed to "If I meet Wormtail, so much the worse for him!" For one thing, PP may have "pulled the trigger" on Cedric, but Voldy was RESPONSIBLE for Cedric's death. AND, in the moment when Harry makes this pronouncement about Snape, the murder of his mentor and protector DD is *fresh* in his mind. He SAW it, he's enraged, and of course he's got revenge against Snape on his mind. I don't see any reason he should be thinking of vengeance on Wormtail in that moment. I guess the way I see it, Harry probably ranks those he'd like to be rid of thusly: #1 -- Voldemort, for killing his parents, for ordering the killing of Cedric, for wreaking havoc and generally being the Evil Overlord causing all the problems; #2 -- Snape, for killing Dumbledore, for his role in leading Voldy to his parents, and for *six years' worth* of snarky, sarcastic, sneering, belittling, and occasionally cruel treatment of himself and his friends; #3 -- Wormtail, for leading Voldy to his parents, for his role in bringing Voldy back, and for generally doing Voldy's bidding. At *some* level, though, Harry may remember DD's words about how he may well someday be grateful that Wormtail is in his (Harry's) debt. This may not make him despise Wormtail any less, but it might have an influence on the immediacy (or lack thereof) that he feels about doing him in. Siriusly Snapey Susan, who believes Harry *is* wrong about Snape in some ways, but who understands why Harry believes what he does. From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Thu Jan 26 02:58:18 2006 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2006 02:58:18 -0000 Subject: Draco and Harry In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147060 > Betsy Hp: > Well, no it wouldn't matter to the reader would it. I mean, JKR > also uses Draco to introduce a fly in the WW ointment here, doesn't > she. So the fact that there are a "right sort" and "wrong sort" in > the WW is the main point the reader can take from this conversation. Alla: Well, not only that, but the fact that Draco SHARES the POV that there are "wrong sort" and "right sort" in WW and that is the main point I take from this conversation. Betsy Hp: > However, there is a certain significance, at least IMO, in the fact > that Draco doesn't *knowingly* insult Harry or his mother. After > all, JKR could have easily had Draco say something like "You're > Harry Potter? Your mother shouldn't have been allowed at Hogwarts," > and still gotten her point across. That she doesn't do it that way > suggests there's more going on here, I think. Alla: I don't understand what are you trying to say. What difference does it make that Draco does not "knowingly" insults Harry or his mother? He still insults her by implication. Are you arguing that it somehow makes Draco a person of better character because he insults ALL muggleborns witches and wizards. What are you arguing? If you do argue that, doesn't it make Draco worse person since he is prejudiced aagainst ALL Muggleborns not just Lily Evans? JMO, Alla From ceridwennight at hotmail.com Thu Jan 26 03:50:37 2006 From: ceridwennight at hotmail.com (Ceridwen) Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2006 03:50:37 -0000 Subject: ESE!Lupin condensed and Lupin and Sirius replies In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147061 Christina: > On top of that, I assume you're talking about the "either must die at > the hand of the other" line. That can be interpreted very strictly, > as I believe you are doing here, or very loosely. The dictionary > definition of "at the hand of" is "by or through the action (or > agency) of." So if a member of Voldemort's organization, acting in > his interest, kills Harry, is this a fulfillment of the prophecy? If > Voldemort orders somebody to kill Harry, is this a fulfillment of the > prophecy? If Voldemort and Harry are dueling, and Harry trips and > falls into the veil, is this a fulfillment of the prophecy? Ceridwen: 'At the hand of' could also imply 'beside'. I'm in a silly mood tonight. So I just had a mental image: Harry and Voldemort are dueling. Snape shows up for one reason or another. Harry hates Snape. Voldemort doesn't trust him and decides he wants him dead. Harry and LV stop duelling and turn on Snape. Snape kills one or the other of them, 'at the hand of (beside) the other'. Ceridwen, now wandering in search of ESE!Weasleyclan threads. From stevejjen at earthlink.net Thu Jan 26 04:06:06 2006 From: stevejjen at earthlink.net (Jen Reese) Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2006 04:06:06 -0000 Subject: Tom Riddle Sr. (Was: Why Tom left Merope) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147062 > Magpie: > > I still think this is unfair to Tom Sr. It seems like a classic > case of putting the victim on trial. It's nobody's business who > Tom wants to marry, and who says the only good thing about Celia > was that she was the correct class? He's a Muggle with a right to > lead his own life and marry whomever he wants. A random witch > doses him with a love potion and forces him, through mind control, > to throw over the person he was with by choice and have sex with > her and marry her. I don't see how the date rape analogy isn't > accurate. Jen: While I completely agree Tom deserves the freedom to choose a partner without chemical intervention, I don't think Dumbledore paints the same picture of Merope as outlined above. He believes taking away someone's free will is reprehensible but also wants Harry to understand that he views Merope is a pitiable person and not a criminal. He speaks of her possibly using a love potion because she might view it as the 'romantic' option, and that she plotted her escape from Marvolo and Morfin out of 'desperation'. The message I got is there were two victims here, one a witch who never learned how to use her magical power and was not raised in a household where ethical considerations in the use of magic were discussed. She had no opportunity to train at Hogwarts as far as we know, and had no input from outside sources to provide feedback on what using a love potion actually means. From my reading, the pensieve scene and Dumbledore portrayed her as almost child-like, with a child-like wish for romantic love rather than someone who is completely coherent that she is abusing her power. Dumbledore also seems to be giving her some credit for recognizing she was 'enslaving' Tom and making the decision to stop the love potion, as well as not magically luring him back when he chose to leave. I think the fact Merope let him leave points to how little power she actually felt she had. > Magpie: > There's no reason Tom had to see it that way--he was in despair > and helpless. Why would he see the person who kept him a slave > for a year as such? Why assume he was thinking clearly himself? > He never had much of a life again either. Why assume Merope was > the traumatized one? Jen: We have no canon how Tom felt other than to say he was 'hoodwinked'. He may have been traumatized and that led him to live with his parents and never venture out again. He must have lost Cecilia after appearing to run away with another woman. We do know Merope was unable or unwilling to use her powers after he left, and we know Tonks was an example of a witch losing some of her power over unrequited love. I do think the implication is Merope was traumatized by his leaving and possibly also by her own actions. I guess I'm wondering why both can't be traumatized? Magpie: > Tom Sr. seems to be being held up to a pretty high standard here, > while Merope's actual crime is trivialized because she was lonely > and Tom Sr. was rich and arrogant. Jen: Perhaps it was the way the story was presented? I'm not exactly certain of the author intent here but I didn't think 'criminal' when I read Merope's story. Personally I found the comparison between Merope and Lily quite sad when Dumbledore said: "Yes, Merope chose death in spite of a son who needed her, but do not judge her too harshly, Harry. She was greatly weakened by long suffering and she never had your mother's courage." (chap. 13, p. 262, Scholastic). Jen From amiabledorsai at yahoo.com Thu Jan 26 05:12:36 2006 From: amiabledorsai at yahoo.com (amiabledorsai) Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2006 05:12:36 -0000 Subject: Draco and Harry (was:The GoF Train Scene - and beyond...) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147063 Betsy HP: > It's for the best that Harry gets adopted by the >Weasleys. The Malfoys would have been a disaster. Amiable Dorsai: It's probably too early in the 21st to be choosing the Understatement of the Century, but I'd like to nominate that for consideration. Betsy HP: > And I do see Draco's and Harry's first meeting as the > beginning of a beautiful friendship. It's the old > "hate each other on first sight" clich?, with all the > mis-speakings and mis-interpertations such clich?s > involve... Amiable Dorsai: It is hard to get over a bad first impression isn't it? Fortunately, Harry's had plenty of opportunities to see Draco's good side. I took a quick run through the first three books for examples of Draco's better nature. I had little difficulty finding them: There's his concern for Harry's well-being: "You'll soon find out some wizarding families are much better than others, Potter. You don't want to go making friends with the wrong sort. I can help you there." (SS) "I do feel so sorry," said Draco Malfoy, one Potions class, "for all those people who have to stay at Hogwarts for Christmas because they're not wanted at home." He was looking over at Harry as he spoke. Crabbe and Goyle chuckled. (SS) "I'd be careful if I were you, Potter," he said slowly. "Unless you're a bit politer you'll go the same way as your parents. They didn't know what was good for them, either. You hang around with riffraff like the Weasleys and that Hagrid, and it'll rub off on you." (SS) His cool nerve: "AAAAAAAAAARGH!" Malfoy let out a terrible scream and bolted -- so did Fang. (SS) "I'm dying!" Malfoy yelled as the class panicked. "I'm dying look at me! It's killed me!" (PA) His instinctive feel for animals: "This is very easy," Malfoy drawled, loud enough for Harry to hear him. "I knew it must have been, if Potter could do it.... I bet you're not dangerous at all, are you?" he said to the hippogriff. "Are you, you great ugly brute?" (PA) His concern for the poor: "Not as surprised as I am to see you in a shop, Weasley," retorted Malfoy. "I suppose your parents will go hungry for a month to pay for all those." "Look at the state of his robes," Malfoy would say in a loud whisper as Professor Lupin passed. "He dresses like our old house-elf" (PA) "I heard your father finally got his hands on some gold this summer, Weasley," said Malfoy. "Did your mother die of shock?" (PA) His dedication to sportsmanship and fair play: Harry swung his wand high, but Malfoy had already started on "two"... (CS) "You gave Mr. Malfoy quite a fright," said Lupin. Harry stared. Lying in a crumpled heap on the ground were Malfoy, Crabbe, Goyle, and Marcus Flint, the Slytherin team Captain, all struggling to remove themselves from long, black, hooded robes. It looked as though Malfoy had been standing on Goyle's shoulders. (PA) Horrified, he looked around. Malfoy had thrown himself forward, grabbed hold of the Firebolt's tail, and was pulling it back. (PA) His commitment to equality for all Witches and Wizards: "No one asked your opinion, you filthy little Mudblood," he spat. (CS) "Saint Potter, the Mudbloods' friend," said Malfoy slowly. "He's another one with no proper wizard feeling, or he wouldn't go around with that jumped up Granger Mudblood. And people think he's Slytherin's heir!" (CS) But I know one thing - last time the Chamber of Secrets was opened, a Mudblood died. So I bet it's a matter of time before one of them's killed this time .... I hope it's Granger," he said with relish. (CS) "I'm quite surprised the Mudbloods haven't all packed their bags by now," Malfoy went on. "Bet you five Galleons the next one dies. Pity it wasn't Granger -" (CS) And of course, his impulse to share: "But we don't feel like leaving, do we, boys? We've eaten all our food and you still seem to have some." (SS) Yes, I'm sure that Harry will soon come to his senses and realize what a swell fellow Draco is and will ask him on bended knee to forget the past and be friends. Amiable Dorsai From belviso at attglobal.net Thu Jan 26 05:05:10 2006 From: belviso at attglobal.net (Magpie) Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2006 00:05:10 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Tom Riddle Sr. (Was: Why Tom left Merope) References: Message-ID: <015001c62236$15ca0fa0$abba400c@Spot> No: HPFGUIDX 147064 > Jen: From my reading, the > pensieve scene and Dumbledore portrayed her as almost child-like, > with a child-like wish for romantic love rather than someone who is > completely coherent that she is abusing her power. Dumbledore also > seems to be giving her some credit for recognizing she > was 'enslaving' Tom and making the decision to stop the love potion, > as well as not magically luring him back when he chose to leave. I > think the fact Merope let him leave points to how little power she > actually felt she had. Magpie: I have sympathy for Merope in the situation too--and the fact that she ultimately seems to see the difference between love and what she's got says to me that she learned a painful lesson. I don't really want to see Merope punished--I'd be happy for her to have found a real relationship later on. Unfortunately that didn't happen. She definitely is pitiable--I think she deserved love as much as anyone else. I just think it's unreasonable to think that this is what Tom Riddle should be feeling. To me it does read like they were both shattered by the whole experience and neither of them was able to go on with life after it. > Jen: Perhaps it was the way the story was presented? I'm not exactly > certain of the author intent here but I didn't think 'criminal' when > I read Merope's story. Magpie: Oh, I didn't either--and I don't think of her as a criminal now. But when I look at the cold facts of the situation it is Merope who is acting upon the other person. I wasn't so much reacting to the canon as what seemed like the idea that Tom Riddle should have been taking care of Merope. That just throws the situation into cold relief for me, because Tom Riddle was the one with his free will taken away no matter how you look at it. If we cut Merope some slack for being ill-used we should cut Tom Riddle some slack for also being ill-used. Especially since he's a Muggle and so even more out of control in the situation. -m From darkmatter30 at yahoo.com Thu Jan 26 06:18:22 2006 From: darkmatter30 at yahoo.com (Richard) Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2006 06:18:22 -0000 Subject: The Secret Revealed! ESE!Arthur In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147065 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "olivierfouquet2000" wrote: > > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Geoff Bannister" wrote: > > Geoff: > > But how do you explain Harry's vision of the attack in OOTP? Surely > > Arthur couldn't produce the impression which Harry had of being the > > snake? > > > > And how do Arthur's injuries which brought him to St.Mungo's fit in > > with this intriguing theory? He was supposed to have wounds that would > > not heal properly for example. Had he got nurses who were secret > > supporters with him? Or were they under the Imperius curse? If so, he > > had been very busy with his wand. > > > > Olivier > Right, let's go back to what happened. LV possessed a snake and attacked a sleeping > Arthur. He wounded him badly, and Arthur would have died if he hadn't been discovered. > Now think about it: why didn't LV kill Arthur once and for all? Arthur was unconscious, > defenseless. One more bite and he was gone. The ESE!Arthur theory simply states that > Arthur and LV deliberately engineered this attack. Arthur was going to be hurt badly > enough so that Harry would be absolutely convinced his visions were important and > necessary. You'll notice that it's when Harry mentions this event that Ron is convinced that > Sirius is trapped in the Ministry, and the change of allegiance of Ron is what finally > switches the balance. Richard here: We're talking about the toxic effects of venom from a snake bite, not the blood loss and tissue damage from the bite of a grizzly bear or some other large, toothsome and beclawed predator. Where some creatures would be able to kill due to the severity of the wounds they can inflict on an victim that is hors de combat, snake venom takes time, with different venoms taking differing times according to quantity, type and location of injection. Also, snakes don't have an infinite supply of venom. A few bites, and it will take some time to replenish a supply that we are also informed Voldemort is dependent upon for his survival. So, I think asserting, "One more bite and he was gone," stretches the facts more than a bit. As for my reading of Ron's reaction, and Harry's behavior, I see it more as Harry working through the "facts," and slowly coming to conclusions about what must be done, and Ron simply being the frequently clueless git he tends to be. So, these two points don't seem to support and ESE!Arthur at all, as far as I'm concerned. Besides, I think JKR has made it entirely too clear that Arthur LIKES muggles, which would not stand him in good stead with Voldemort, nor with the majority of his principal supporters. Richard, who thinks it is fun to speculate, but thinks some theories can be a little TOO "fun." From juli17 at aol.com Thu Jan 26 06:40:42 2006 From: juli17 at aol.com (juli17ptf) Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2006 06:40:42 -0000 Subject: VA/H=Mx13+RP? (was: Was the eavesdropper unimportant to Harry?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147066 Carol > wrote: > And yet, setting aside the death of Dumbledore (which has yet to > > be fully explained), Wormtail's sins against Harry are much greater > > than Snape's. > > Lupinlore wrote: > Well, that is setting aside a lot. But I disagree that even a DDM! > Snape has sinned less against Harry than has Wormtail. He was at > least as responsible for the Potter's deaths as Peter was. And his > methodical abuse of Harry over six years is reprehensible beyond > belief, at least equal to Peter's other sins. > Julie: Assuming DDM!Snape (as you are above) are you saying you think telling Voldemort about the prophecy then REGRETTING it and making a SINCERE effort to atone for that mistake by trying to keep the intended victims alive (going to DD, switching sides, etc) is equal to deliberately betraying two of your closest friends to an almost certain death? As for Snape's methodical verbal/emotional abuse of Harry, again are you saying that his abuse of Harry is EQUAL to Peter's murder of Cedric, murder of 12 other innocent people and very willing resurrection of a psychopath? VA/H=Mx13+RP? (Where VA=verbal abuse, H=Harry, M=murder, RP=resurrected psychopath). Maybe you actually believe they are equal but I don't. Julie From olivier.fouquet+harry at m4x.org Thu Jan 26 09:45:45 2006 From: olivier.fouquet+harry at m4x.org (olivierfouquet2000) Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2006 09:45:45 -0000 Subject: The Secret Revealed! ESE!Arthur In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147067 > We're talking about the toxic effects of venom from a snake bite, > not the blood loss and tissue damage from the bite of a grizzly bear > or some other large, toothsome and beclawed predator. Where some > creatures would be able to kill due to the severity of the wounds > they can inflict on an victim that is hors de combat, snake venom > takes time, with different venoms taking differing times according > to quantity, type and location of injection. Also, snakes don't > have an infinite supply of venom. A few bites, and it will take > some time to replenish a supply that we are also informed Voldemort > is dependent upon for his survival. So, I think asserting, "One > more bite and he was gone," stretches the facts more than a bit. Olivier You are right if we are talking about real snakes. However, magical snakes, well, we have Harry's word (and he should know, he was the snake): "Is Arthur seriously injured?' 'Yes,' said Harry emphatically - why were they all so slow on the uptake, did they not realise how much a person bled when fangs that long pierced their side?", "he reared high from the floor and struck once, twice, three times, plunging his fangs deeply into the man's flesh, feeling his ribs splinter beneath his jaws, feeling the warm gush of blood" "blood was splattering on to the floor"etc. So , the giant snake which attacked Arthur could have killed Arthur without any poison. In fact, canon is crystal-clear, Harry worries about "his" fangs being poisonous much later: it's the severity of the injury that panicks him and the blood-loss that panicks him. > As for my reading of Ron's reaction, and Harry's behavior, I see it > more as Harry working through the "facts," and slowly coming to > conclusions about what must be done, and Ron simply being the > frequently clueless git he tends to be. > > So, these two points don't seem to support and ESE!Arthur at all, as > far as I'm concerned. Besides, I think JKR has made it entirely too > clear that Arthur LIKES muggles, which would not stand him in good > stead with Voldemort, nor with the majority of his principal > supporters. > > Richard, who thinks it is fun to speculate, but thinks some theories > can be a little TOO "fun." > Just so you know, Richard, I don't believe a word of ESE!Arthur, ESE! Arthur is just an exercise in style to show that one can take any HP character and build a convincing case that he's ESE by selecting somewhat improbable events and forgetting about anything that goes against the theory. In fact, I'm even a bit surprised that anyone could tkink that I was writing seriously (likewise, it took me a long long time and her repeated confirmations to believe that Pippin was actually seriously in defending ESE!Lupin). Olivier From c.john at imperial.ac.uk Thu Jan 26 10:35:23 2006 From: c.john at imperial.ac.uk (esmith222002) Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2006 10:35:23 -0000 Subject: =?iso-8859-1?q?Re:_Lord_Voldemort's_Six_Horcruxes=3F_Are_Dumbledore=92s_Opinions_Wrong=3F_(LVs_SHADOW)?= In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147068 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "chrusotoxos" wrote: > > > Interesting theory, but I don't like the idea that your appearance > becomes horcux-like with time...we don't see LV looking like a cup > or a ring, do we? No, but these are inanimate objects. Nagini is a living breathing animal and as such I think it quite likely that Voldemort would become more snakelike if he shared a piece of his soul with Nagini. > IMO, his snake-like traits are there to show his descent towards > spiritual hell, and the least human animal is, in judeo-christian > culture, the snake. The fact that Voldemort is not snakelike after making 4 Horcruxes, but is after 5 Horcuxes would argue against this, I feel. WHy is it more evil to commit 5 murders than 4!! > At this point, LV knows that Harry is a powerful enemy; he wouldn't > fight him without the protection of a magical number. > > What do you say? I think, considering how often Harry has defied him, Voldemort shows nothing but disdain for Harry. His casual attempt to kill Harry at the end of OOTP suggests he isn't that bothered about Harry. And if it is Harry that Voldemort is after, why not use Malfoy to get at Harry, rather than DD - it would be a lot easier task! Perhaps Voldemort may still use Harry for his last Horcrux if he gets the chance, but I don't think Voldemort considers him a worthy adversary. Brothergib Brothergib From c.john at imperial.ac.uk Thu Jan 26 10:42:51 2006 From: c.john at imperial.ac.uk (esmith222002) Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2006 10:42:51 -0000 Subject: =?iso-8859-1?q?Re:_Lord_Voldemort's_Six_Horcruxes=3F_Are_Dumbledore=92s_Opinions_Wrong=3F_(LVs_SHADOW)?= In-Reply-To: <943501936.20060123164005@mindspring.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147069 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Dave Hardenbrook wrote: > > > Monday, January 23, 2006, 8:37:19 AM, esmith222002 wrote: > > e> VOLDEMORT'S SNAKELIKE FEATURES ARE THEREFORE COMPLETELY ATTRIBUTABLE > e> TO HORCRUX 5!! > > I'm not sure I agree with this -- My theory is that LV's snakelike > appearence comes from his use of Nagini's venom as a "dietary > supplement" (so to speak) to the Horcruxes -- possibly to better > preserve his physical body from destruction. > Interesting, but Voldemort is not snakelike when he reemerges from his long 'exile' when he conversed with 'the very worst of our kind'. I think we can safely assume that when Voldemort met with DD at Hogwarts, he had four Horcruxes, so was already fairly safe from death. Why would he then start using snake venom to protect his physical body? Protect it from what? It was clearly ineffective against the Avada Kedavra! Brothergib From ceridwennight at hotmail.com Thu Jan 26 11:23:47 2006 From: ceridwennight at hotmail.com (Ceridwen) Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2006 11:23:47 -0000 Subject: The Secret Revealed! ESE!Arthur In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147070 > Richard, who thinks it is fun to speculate, but thinks some theories > can be a little TOO "fun." Ceridwen: Speculating about various and sundry ESE!Weasleys is more than a fun speculation. It's about as impossible as anything can get in the Potterverse. The whole thing is just fun, from start to finish. Add your own favorite ESE!Weasley to the mix. Richard > So, these two points don't seem to support and ESE!Arthur at all, as > far as I'm concerned. Besides, I think JKR has made it entirely too > clear that Arthur LIKES muggles, which would not stand him in good > stead with Voldemort, nor with the majority of his principal > supporters. Ceridwen: Going off on the ESE!Weasley again, which remember is *all* in good fun, so Arthur likes Muggles. He would love to have one as a pet, I'm sure. It could sit on the hearth, and wouldn't it be funny to watch it scurry about when someone floos or floos in? Arthur's liking for Muggles is about the same as an advanced person's liking for a backward culture. He's interested, he feels some sympathy, but he isn't really all that interested in getting to actually know the culture, just in picking up 'artifacts'. It's a more liberal form of rigging toilets to explode. He doesn't hurt the things, but to him, they're just a curiosity. He's like a Colonizer who is looking fondly at the native population as cute, interesting *children* who need him or others like him if they're ever going to get out of their backward ways. It's an innocent sort of arrogance. Like the way I like my dog, but I certainly wouldn't think he could vote, or take care of himself if I had to be away from home. And, all dogs are like that, aren't they? All dogs, all Muggles... So, just because Arthur likes Muggles that doesn't mean he thinks they're anywhere near equal with Wizards and Witches. And, because no one seemed to notice it, I think this is a family cabal. Molly with her own ESE! ways and reasonings, Arthur with his, and the kids getting themselves in good with Harry, too, just waiting to strike. Olivier > > Right, let's go back to what happened. LV possessed a snake and > attacked a sleeping > > Arthur. He wounded him badly, and Arthur would have died if he > hadn't been discovered. > > Now think about it: why didn't LV kill Arthur once and for all? > Arthur was unconscious, > > defenseless. One more bite and he was gone. The ESE!Arthur theory > simply states that > > Arthur and LV deliberately engineered this attack. Arthur was > going to be hurt badly > > enough so that Harry would be absolutely convinced his visions > were important and > > necessary. You'll notice that it's when Harry mentions this event > that Ron is convinced that > > Sirius is trapped in the Ministry, and the change of allegiance of > Ron is what finally > > switches the balance. Ceridwen: Olivier, good points! And we've seen how little concern is made over even very serious accidents in the WW. So Arthur taking on the role of victim really didn't think he had anything to worry about. A few spells from a healer, and Bilius is your uncle. Unfortunately for ESE!Arthur, Nagini is a magical snake. Maybe LV misjudged the damage. Or maybe it was necessary in order to get Harry worried. If LV knew Harry was there, he may have been able to judge his reactions. We do know from canon that LV doesn't think of the comfort or safety of his followers, unless their safety can benefit him (as when the Longbottom Four were broken out of Azkaban). But when their damage is to LV's benefit, he's more than ready to see it happen. And, Ron. Very good catch! Ron's in an interesting place in the books. We know he's the chess strategist in the trio, yet he plays the dummy so well! We tend to forget that he's the Strategist, unless we want to make an avatar saying 'The Brains/The Strategy/The Brawn' or whatever it is (Hermione, Ron, Harry). We just see him as being 'clueless as always'. But, getting Harry to go OTT enough to remember Arthur's 'plight' so he could add his voice without sounding suspicious, was a major move. Disclaimer: ESE!Weasleys is not a serious suggestion, but it is fun. Ceridwen. From valiantannie at aol.com Wed Jan 25 00:38:12 2006 From: valiantannie at aol.com (valiantannie at aol.com) Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2006 19:38:12 EST Subject: Assuming they survive... Message-ID: <1f8.1a17a25a.31082274@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 147071 Luckdragon: > Any thoughts on what the Hogwarts students will choose for careers > after Hogwarts. > Harry-DADA Teacher at Hogwarts > Ron-Wizard Chess Champion > Hermione-magical creature equality rep. at M.O.M. > Neville-Healer and discoverer of new medicinal plant properties. > Ginny-Hogwarts Flying instructor and Quidditch ref. > Arthur-M.O.M Naaahh, Ron will be keeper for the Chudley Cannons! But all the others seem very plausible. And I have never posted on this list before, having been a lurker for some time now. Don't blush or anything, but I LOVE the collective discussions; they are for the most part well thought out and researched, and thought provoking. And sometimes I just laugh, because so many of you have a gift for the turned phrase, e.g., "snack-happy dementors," "my crow...." I'm just a geeky 50 year old, enjoying the discussions, and a great fan of the Harry Potter stories. Thanks for such fun. I'll sign with my real name, though.... Paula Kelman Start by doing what's necessary, then do what's possible, and suddenly you are doing the impossible. - St Francis of Assisi [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From nkafkafi at yahoo.com Thu Jan 26 14:58:59 2006 From: nkafkafi at yahoo.com (nkafkafi) Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2006 14:58:59 -0000 Subject: ESE!Lupin condensed and Lupin and Sirius replies In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147073 > > Pippin: > > The identity of the person who hexed Harry's broom in PS/SS is not > an "official" mystery either. Nobody except Hagrid ever suggests that > it wasn't Snape. Neri: Well, I think this is a borderline case, because the trio and Hagrid do discuss it. But in general I agree. In fact I can't think of even one clear-cut official mystery that suggests the bad guy in SS/PS *isn't* Snape. This is precisely why the words "It was Quirrell" were so shattering (I've found that I'm not the only HP fan who remembers the exact moment he was reading them the first time). This is the place where the reader first realizes that JKR has more aspirations in the mystery department than Enid Blyton. But as JKR's mystery plots became more and more developed, when the WW background became richer and richer, and especially when we started building huge conspiracy theories around any tiny "clue", it became necessary to give us some direction: This is significant and this is not. From CoS on the final solutions and especially the identity of the bad guys always depend on solving several official mysteries. And the main function of JKR's interviews and website seems to be telling us which mysteries are official and which are not. > Pippin: > Interestingly, Hagrid is the only character in HBP > to suggest that Harry might have misunderstood what happened on > the tower, which you also seem to feel is not an "official" mystery. > Neri: If you go upthread to my original list of official mysteries you'll find "what really happened on the tower" in there. It was one of my points against ESE!Lupin, which doesn't solve this mystery (or any other big official mystery). BTW, I wouldn't count much on Hagrid's support for Snape. He also refused to believe Dumbledore was dead at the time. I don't remember that we were told what was his opinion on Snape after he learned Dumbledore is indeed dead. > Pippin: > The identity of Wormtail *is* an "official" mystery, at least until > Lupin says, "Peter is Wormtail." At that point it seems solved -- > but what if it isn't? Neri: Who were Moony, Padfoot and Prongs were also official mysteries at the time, but they were officially closed together with Wormtail. Of course, this doesn't mean that Wormtail (or Moony, or Padfoot, or Prongs) can't turn out to be somebody else now. It is just that when a theory designed to be a big Bang at the climax of the whole series doesn't solve even *one* big official mystery, this is when I start wondering if it's even going in the right direction. > Pippin: > There are mysteries for which we are given provisional solutions > which in later books turn out to be incomplete...why Dumbledore left > Harry at the Dursleys, for example, or why Snape hates the Marauders. > There is usually some hint that they are partial, as there is in this case. Neri: Incomplete yes, but I can't remember an official solution that was later turned 180 degrees. However, I never claimed that this can't happen. Of course it can. All I'm saying is that if a theory answers, among other things, a few official mysteries, this is a good sign. > Pippin: > You can find plenty of debates on this list over whether Snape knew > the Marauder nicknames or recognized the names on the map > from some other source. The Pensieve scene in OOP does not really > answer the question, as it's not clear how much of the MWPP dialogue > Snape could hear at the time. Neri: I don't consider a debate in the list as making a mystery official. We had endless debates about whether Snape is a vampire, and it turned out JKR has never meant it even as a red herring. Regarding Snape knowing the Marauders' nicknames, I'm personally sure he knows it from the pensieve. He didn't hear it the first time around, of course, but he probably visited this memory again, and I'm sure he wouldn't resist a chance to spy on the Marauders, even 20 years after the fact. If Harry could hear the Marauders' conversation in the pensieve, then so could Snape. In fact, I always thought that the pensieve scene was written, in a small part, to answer the question of where Snape had learned the Marauders' nicknames. > Pippin: > Wormtail's inconsistent ability *is* an "official" mystery: > "But Wormtail --displaying a presence of mind I would never have > expected of him--convinced Bertha Jorkins to accompany him on > a night-time stroll." --GoF ch 33. > Neri: Hmm, I'd say this is even more borderline than Hagrid's support of Snape in SS/PS. If there's a mystery here at all, it could very well be presented as "why had people underestimated Wormtail?" Or it could be taken as the official closing of a mystery: "Wormtail *was* underestimated". Especially since at that point we have good reason to believe Wormtail had deceived the whole WW to think he's dead for 12 years, successfully lies to Voldy and has the guts to cut his own hand. > Pippin: > What can kill unicorns is also an "official" mystery. > Wormtail is able to prepare a potion "concocted from unicorn blood" > with no explanation of how a "poor wizard" like Peter would obtain it. > Quirrell was able to kill unicorns, supposedly, but Quirrell is now dead, > so who is helping Voldemort kill unicorns in GoF? Hagrid said a werewolf > couldn't do it, but the unicorns in PS/SS were attacked previous to the > night of Harry's detention. "Second time in a week." Hagrid > says, "I found one dead last Wednesday." Hagrid knows that a non- > wizard werewolf couldn't catch one, and the attacks are too spaced out > to have been done at full moon. But he's not thinking about > someone casting a spell -- and now we know that there's a spell > that causes terrible slashing cuts, and the Marauders knew it. > Neri: "How Wormtail obtained the unicorn blood in GoF?" is a classic example of an unofficial mystery. Harry had never wondered about it or discussed it with the trio. Dumbledore had never even mentioned it in any of his talks. JKR had never mentioned it in a chat or in her website. Ron had never made a joke about it. It was never highlighted in the books in any way. Again, this doesn't mean that it won't come up. But the series is full of small mysteries like that, and Book 7 will have to be thousands of pages long to answer all of them. So if I have to bet on an official mystery against an unofficial mystery, I'd say the chances of the first to be answered in Book 7 are much better. I'd say the question "Who killed the unicorns in SS/PS?" is an officially solved mystery. Quirrellmort killed them. > Pippin: > Why Dumbledore is so confident that a supposed murderer's escape > will prove a godsend is also an "official" mystery. One possible > explanation is that Peter is no occlumens and Dumbledore knows > he couldn't have been the spy. > Neri: Well, I'm not sure I'd categorize "why is Dumbledore so confident that a supposed murderer's escape will prove a godsend?" as an official mystery. I mean, officially Dumbledore immediately provided the answer: "because he owes his life to Harry Potter". > Pippin: > Your interpretation of Wormtail's line "The boy is nothing to me, > nothing to me at all!" is that Voldemort doesn't know it's a lie. But > a legilimens does not detect objective truth. He can only detect the > thoughts and feelings that contradict the lie. > > Voldemort does not believe that any of his servants are faithful to him. > He has no comprehension of human ties whatever. If Wormtail feels > some underlying loyalty to Harry, how would Voldemort detect it? > He has never felt such things himself. Indeed > he consistently underestimates what people are willing to do for > one another -- he never thought that Lily would throw herself > in front of Harry, and he thinks she was a fool to do so even though > it resulted in his discorporation. > > Inviting people to forswear their ties to one another floats his boat -- > it validates his choice to live as he does. He did it to Lily, he does it > to Wormtail here, and he'll do it to the Malfoys in HBP. In short, > IMO, if the sentence were changed to "My life debt to Harry Potter is > nothing to me, nothing to me at all!" Voldemort would accept > it just as easily. > Neri: I don't think Voldemort is so blind that he can't *recognize* love and gratitude, even if he doesn't feel them himself. Here are some of Dumbledore's words about Voldemort: PoA, Ch.22, p. 427 (Scholastic): "I'm much mistaken if Voldemort wants his servant to be in the debt of Harry Potter" OotP, Ch. 37 p. 828: "I was sure that if he realized that our relationship was ? or had ever been ? closer than that of headmaster and pupil, he would seize his chance to use you as a mean to spy on me." Ibid, p. 831: "But Kreacher's information made him realize that the one person whom you would go to any length to rescue was Sirius Black" Ibid: p. 838: "I cared about you too much In other words, I acted exactly as Voldemort expect we fools who love to act." But assuming for a moment you are right, are you saying ESE!Lupin didn't tell Voldemort about Wormtail's Debt, and didn't explain him the significance of it? > Pippin: > Whether Dumbledore was reckless in trusting Snape is also an > "official" mystery. At least automatically assuming Lupin was > worthy of trust is a far more understandable mistake. > Neri: I agree this is an official mystery since Snape, McGonagall and Harry raise the question, but I'm not sure I understand your point here. Are you saying that Dumbledore recklessly trusting ESE!Lupin explains him recklessly trusting Snape, or what? > Pippin: > That's a stretch, IMO. Why not have Lupin suggest taking the other children > back to the castle? Surely Ron and Hermione don't need to see Pettigrew > die? Neri: It would mess with the next parts of the plot, and it would show disloyalty to Sirius, letting him shouldering the blame alone. It's like saying "oh, they already convicted you for this murder anyway, so you might as well do it yourself. No need to involve me in this mess". Personally I'd prefer a Lupin who shares the full responsibility over a Lupin who knows that Sirius is going to kill Pettigrew but prefers to slither out of the scene and keep his own hands clean. That would be more like Snape, who is happy to let the dementors do his dirty work for him. > Pippin: > Indeed, the evil plot-device fairy was very busy with Lupin that night. > First she made him forget that he was going to transform, then he > forgot that Snape would be bringing the potion, then he > forgot to de-activate the Marauder's Map, then he overlooked Harry's > invisibility cloak, then he forgot his duty as a teacher to ignore Ron's > protests and splint his leg, then he forgot that killing would split his > and Sirius's souls (surely as a DADA teacher he would know that?), > and he constantly forgot that he wasn't the leader of the gang and > should therefore not be telling Sirius what to do. > Neri: You forgot to mention that he also neglected to brush his teeth that night . And if that doesn't prove he's ESE I don't know what does. I think Lupin's forgetfulness is easily explained by the DADA jinx. It hardly did him any good, after all. He would have been much better off had he done the sensible thing: take the Map with him, pick up Harry's invisibility cloak, and he'd be in a position to do anything he'd want to, whether he's ESE or not, without any intrusion from Snape. If the evil plot-device fairy was busy that night it was mostly against Lupin. Now, I don't think that it would be like JKR to blame a conscious choice on the DADA jinx, which is why I hold Lupin responsible for going to kill Pettigrew, the same way I hold Sirius responsible for that, Hermione and Ron for letting it happen without a single squeak of protest, and Snape for trying to get two people to lose their souls because of a school grudge. I'm not sure what this would have done to *his* soul, but perhaps he could make an educated guess, since he's supposed to know a lot about DADA too. > Pippin: > It's a strange thing. My theory is unashamedly plot-driven, yet > it allows the characters to behave in character-driven ways, while your > theory, which is supposedly character-driven, appears to require > clumsy plotting to support it. > Neri: Not by my count. By my count, Goodguy!Lupin acts OOC hardly once during the whole night when Hermione does also. His motivation changes only once and with very good reason: he finds for the first time in 12 years that Pettigrew is alive and Sirius is innocent. Any forgetfulness is nicely explained between the combination of these huge revelations and the DADA jinx. In contrast, ESE!Lpuin can't even be said to act out of character since he doesn't seem to have any consistent character. He doesn't even remember the crimes he himself committed, he changes his motives completely three or four times during the night (I lost the exact count). He makes several very illogical decisions that mostly foil his own objectives. And Hermione still acts OOC once. > > Pippin: > It really doesn't matter what style or genre she's writing in. > Unless you can explain why it improves the story for JKR to > ignore the interior logic of the rules she herself has invented > in a crucial scene involving the principal characters, it's bad > writing for her to do so. > Neri: I'm not sure what you mean here by interior logic and rules. Neri From agdisney at msn.com Thu Jan 26 14:35:27 2006 From: agdisney at msn.com (Andrea Grevera) Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2006 09:35:27 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Thestrals be the key References: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147074 > > I lost track to the discussion, but I think it hasn't been mentioned > yet, that the thestrals may be a way for Harry to get hold of the > horcruxes left. They can find any Place, even if you Don't know where > it is. > > Yours Caro > La Gatta Lucianese: Or owls! Harry could just tell Hedwig, "Go find me those horcruxes!" Andie: If it was really that easy don't you think DD would have used either owls or thestrals? I personally think that Harry & Harry alone is going to be able to find & destroy the remaining horcruxes without any permanent damage to himself. There has to be something with his connection to LV that will protect him when he destroys the horcruxes. I'm not saying Harry is a horcrux because I don't believe that at all, I just feel that the powers LV transferred to Harry will enable Harry to find & destroy the remaining bits of LV's soul. Harry will need & take all the help he can get to figure out where the remaining horcruxes are but the actual destruction of them will be done by Harry & he will be able to do this without suffering any physical or mental damage to himself. I think that if Harry had drunk the potion in the cave he would have survived it the same way LV would have survived if he had gone back for the horcrux himself. LV is going to make sure he will be able to retrieve the horcruxes himself if he needs to without it killing him, so with the transfer of powers to Harry, I think Harry will have the same ability. However RAB left the potion, I'm sure it wouldn't have been harmful to LV because RAB wanted to be sure LV understood that the horcrux was gone and that RAB was the one to remove it. Andie Before posting to any list, you MUST read the group's Admin File! http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/files/Admin_Files/HBF_Text__MUST_READ Please use accurate subject headings and snip unnecessary material from posts to which you're replying! Yahoo! Groups Links [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From foxmoth at qnet.com Thu Jan 26 16:29:44 2006 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2006 16:29:44 -0000 Subject: How to contstruct an ESE!plot was Re: The Secret Revealed! ESE!Arthur In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147075 Olivier: > Just so you know, Richard, I don't believe a word of ESE!Arthur, ESE! Arthur is just an exercise in style to show that one can take any HP character and build a convincing case that he's ESE by selecting somewhat improbable events and forgetting about anything that goes against the theory. In fact, I'm even a bit surprised that anyone could tkink that I was writing seriously (likewise, it took me a long long time and her repeated confirmations to believe that Pippin was actually seriously in defending ESE!Lupin). Pippin: I had a feeling I was being teased :) Not that I would complain. It was a similar impulse that led me to develop ESE!Lupin in the first place. After GoF, the theory was put forward that Snape's betrayal of Dumbledore had been so strongly foreshadowed that it *must* take place. Hmmph, I thought, I bet you could take any HP character and make a case that they would betray Dumbledore. I picked Lupin for my test, not because I saw treachery in him, but because, in her consideration of who might betray Dumbledore, another poster had listed all the characters who were close to him, one after the other, with one exception. She had put Lupin and Sirius on the same line. I began to wonder what JKR was trying to accomplish by associating these characters so closely that people thought of them as a unit. Usually authors try to make their characters as different from one another as they can, conflict being the engine of drama. I began to wonder if Lupin mightn't benefit, as it were, from innocence by association. I was reading a book at the time on how to construct mystery stories, and I thought, suppose PoA was a mystery and Lupin was the villain, what was his crime? The book said that the author must plant a clue to the crime in the sleuth's second interview with the villain. Since Harry does not ask any questions of Lupin in the class, I decided the second interview was Harry's visit to Lupin's office (ch 8). I read the chapter carefully looking for something that might have a bearing on Lupin's conduct at the end of the book, where the crime would be committed, (this is technically called a "reverse mystery") and what did I find? Snape, saying he'd made a whole cauldronful of wolfsbane potion. That had the look of a clue about it. The extra potion is never mentioned again, so why is it in the story at all? It doesn't tell you anything about Snape that we don't know already, and even if it was JKR's purpose to emphasize how enthusiastic Snape is about potion-making, it's slightly out of place. Okay, so there's extra potion, how does that make Lupin a bad guy. What could he do with it? Steal it, obviously. But why steal wolfsbane? Snape is making all Lupin needs and more, and it's of no use to anyone who's not a werewolf. It doesn't even taste good. The only thing you could do with stolen potion, I realized, was take it in secret. And the horrified realization stole over me that Lupin was supposed to have forgotten to take his potion at the end of PoA, and that was how Pettigrew had managed to escape. But, but, if Lupin *had* taken his potion, then he must've *let* Peter escape. And only a servant of Voldemort would do that. I'd always thought it was a weakness of the plot in PoA that unsuspected Death Eaters were supposed to be after Peter and yet we never saw them. Omigawd, what if one of them was right there in the Shrieking Shack all the time? And there were other things about Lupin's behavior that night that made more sense if he was on Voldemort's side. Why was he so excessively guilty? Why the ambiguous words when Sirius begs his forgiveness? There was the mystery of his transforming outside the Shrieking Shack, which didn't make sense if Lupin's transformation was unplanned and couldn't be timed, but made perfect sense if it was. And then I saw him, in my mind's eye, shoulder to shoulder with mad!Sirius about to commit a murder which everyone agrees that James would never have wanted, and saying, quietly, "You should have known, Peter. If Voldemort didn't kill you, we would." Peter should have known that James's friends would go mad and seek revenge? After twelve years? And Lupin wasn't mad, the whole point of discrimination against werewolves being mere prejudice is that when they're not transformed they're just as much in control of themselves as other people are. I thought what you thought. ESE!Lupin is just silly. After all, Snape's betrayal of Dumbledore was very strongly foreshadowed. It was bound to happen. So he's the bad guy, right? But, hold on, this is JKR we're talking about. She was perfectly capable of making it *look* as though Snape had betrayed Dumbledore, and then, just as she had with p-poor stuttering Professor Quirrell, producing a culprit seemingly out of left field, but actually with clues pointing to him all along. But Lupin is a good guy! Except...there ain't no such animal. There are saints, maybe, but Lupin obviously isn't one of them, so who's to say his flaws could not destroy him? If werewolves are normal people, then they have just as much right to make failed choices as others do. Of course series regulars aren't supposed to go wrong, wouldn't sell a whole lot of lunchboxes that way, but JKR has been very clear that HP isn't a series. The characters do change, they grow, they learn, they die -- and they fail. And I knew. I thought I must be wrong, but I knew. Even I didn't think sociopath!Lupin made much sense, but after OOP there was a far more credible reason for Lupin to have joined Voldemort. Voldemort is apparently the only adult wizard who is willing to help the Giants and Goblins fight for their rights. Wouldn't he help the werewolves, too? And right on cue, HPB provided the answer. He would indeed. Yeah, Fenrir is disgusting, but if I was fighting Umbridge, I'd want all the help I could get. And we saw that Dumbledore didn't have much power against Umbridge -- most of what she did was perfectly legal, and Dumbledore doesn't stop people from doing what the law allows, does he? He'll bend it a bit, to keep the innocent out of its path, but he's not leading any revolution even if Umbridge thought he was. Other clues have turned up in later books which support the theory. The stolen potion motif, for one. Lupin's "odd, closed" expression in PoA. He must be an occlumens, but why pick such an obscure way to indicate it? OOP let us know that you can see the Quidditch pitch from the DADA office, a seemingly meaningless bit of detail but one which confirms that transformed!Lupin could have spotted transformed!Sirius at the top of the stands. Just before the dementors showed up. Lupin seems to know an awful lot about dementor for someone who says "I don't pretend to be an expert at fighting dementors, Harry...quite the contrary...." And then you look at what that sentence *really* says. The twelve year gap in Lupin's history, which remains blank though we've got at least a skeleton backstory for every other major character during this time. The very curious discrepancies between what Peter Pettigrew is supposed to have done and his native abilities. And isn't he exactly the sort of person Voldemort likes to frame -- someone who's just barely tolerated, friendless or nearly so. Did any of the Marauders really like him except for James? Lupin's initial appearance, a stranger handing out candy to children on a train -- so much for worrying that kids will feel betrayed, isn't that exactly the 'friendly' stranger they've been warned about? It takes a fair bit of analysis to come up with a theory like this, and why should anyone take the time, unless they're an HP fan with a thing for puzzles and an unwillingness to be satisfied that Snape is the one. But perhaps I'm not the only one. So go ahead, make me a theory for ESE!Weasley that has wordplay, clues, plot points and a Weasley standing shoulder to shoulder with a madman about to kill. I promise not to laugh. :) Pippin whose original ESE!Lupin post may be found at 39362 From rlai1977 at yahoo.com Thu Jan 26 16:36:46 2006 From: rlai1977 at yahoo.com (rlai1977) Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2006 16:36:46 -0000 Subject: Draco and Harry (was:The GoF Train Scene - and beyond...) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147076 > Amiable Dorsai: > It is hard to get over a bad first impression isn't it? Fortunately, > Harry's had plenty of opportunities to see Draco's good side. I took > a quick run through the first three books for examples of Draco's > better nature. I had little difficulty finding them: > > There's his concern for Harry's well-being: > > "You'll soon find out some wizarding families are much better than > others, Potter. You don't want to go making friends with the wrong > sort. I can help you there." (SS) > > "I do feel so sorry," said Draco Malfoy, one Potions class, "for all > those people who have to stay at Hogwarts for Christmas because > they're not wanted at home." He was looking over at Harry as he > spoke. Crabbe and Goyle chuckled. (SS) > > "I'd be careful if I were you, Potter," he said slowly. "Unless you're > a bit politer you'll go the same way as your parents. They didn't know > what was good for them, either. You hang around with riffraff like the > Weasleys and that Hagrid, and it'll rub off on you." (SS) > > > His cool nerve: > > "AAAAAAAAAARGH!" Malfoy let out a terrible scream and bolted -- so > did Fang. (SS) > > "I'm dying!" Malfoy yelled as the class panicked. "I'm dying look at > me! It's killed me!" (PA) > > > His instinctive feel for animals: > > "This is very easy," Malfoy drawled, loud enough for Harry to hear > him. "I knew it must have been, if Potter could do it.... I bet you're > not dangerous at all, are you?" he said to the hippogriff. "Are you, > you great ugly brute?" (PA) > > His concern for the poor: > > "Not as surprised as I am to see you in a shop, Weasley," retorted > Malfoy. "I suppose your parents will go hungry for a month to pay for > all those." > > "Look at the state of his robes," Malfoy would say in a loud whisper > as Professor Lupin passed. "He dresses like our old house-elf" (PA) > > "I heard your father finally got his hands on some gold this summer, > Weasley," said Malfoy. "Did your mother die of shock?" (PA) > > > > His dedication to sportsmanship and fair play: > > Harry swung his wand high, but Malfoy had already started on "two"... (CS) > > > "You gave Mr. Malfoy quite a fright," said Lupin. > > Harry stared. Lying in a crumpled heap on the ground were Malfoy, > Crabbe, Goyle, and Marcus Flint, the Slytherin team Captain, all > struggling to remove themselves from long, black, hooded robes. It > looked as though Malfoy had been standing on Goyle's shoulders. (PA) > > Horrified, he looked around. Malfoy had thrown himself forward, > grabbed hold of the Firebolt's tail, and was pulling it back. (PA) > > > His commitment to equality for all Witches and Wizards: > > "No one asked your opinion, you filthy little Mudblood," he spat. (CS) > > "Saint Potter, the Mudbloods' friend," said Malfoy slowly. "He's > another one with no proper wizard feeling, or he wouldn't go around > with that jumped up Granger Mudblood. And people think he's > Slytherin's heir!" (CS) > > But I know one thing - last time the Chamber of Secrets was opened, a > Mudblood died. So I bet it's a matter of time before one of them's > killed this time .... I hope it's Granger," he said with relish. (CS) > > "I'm quite surprised the Mudbloods haven't all packed their bags by > now," Malfoy went on. "Bet you five Galleons the next one dies. Pity > it wasn't Granger -" (CS) > > And of course, his impulse to share: > > "But we don't feel like leaving, do we, boys? We've eaten all our food > and you still seem to have some." (SS) > > > Yes, I'm sure that Harry will soon come to his senses and realize what > a swell fellow Draco is and will ask him on bended knee to forget the > past and be friends. > > Amiable Dorsai > *ROFL* Thank you. Thank you for sharing the "highlights" of Draco Malfoy's career as THE class clown at Hogwarts. These glorious moments of his made up over half of the reason I love this little bastard so much, for I have a rubbish sort of humour and his supposedly "nasty" remarks managed to make me laugh 90% of the time. I won't butt in your discussion with Betsy about Harry's potential friendship with Draco though, since I have a different perception a bout it from both of you :-) RP From stevejjen at earthlink.net Thu Jan 26 17:01:17 2006 From: stevejjen at earthlink.net (Jen Reese) Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2006 17:01:17 -0000 Subject: Tom Riddle Sr. (Was: Why Tom left Merope) In-Reply-To: <015001c62236$15ca0fa0$abba400c@Spot> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147077 Jen previous: > I'm not exactly certain of the author intent here but I didn't > think 'criminal' when I read Merope's story. Magpie: > Oh, I didn't either--and I don't think of her as a criminal now. > But when I look at the cold facts of the situation it is Merope who > is acting upon the other person. I wasn't so much reacting to the > canon as what seemed like the idea that Tom Riddle should have been > taking care of Merope. That just throws the situation into cold > relief for me, because Tom Riddle was the one with his free will > taken away no matter how you look at it. If we cut Merope some > slack for being ill-used we should cut Tom Riddle some slack for > also being ill-used. Especially since he's a Muggle and so even more > out of control in the situation. Jen: I misinterpreted your position. That's pretty much my take on the situation, too, that JKR meant to present it as somewhat tragic all the way around rather than passing judgment on either Riddle Sr. or Merope for the particulars. Voldemort certainly passes extremely harsh judgement on Riddle, Sr., in the graveyard and I still think there might be some meaning for the story that he does *not* rant about his mom abandoning him, but puts the entire blame squarely on Riddle Sr. The few moments he considers Merope are searing, like when he assumes she couldn't have been magical or wouldn't have died, or when he realizes Burke took advantage of his mum when he obtained the locket from her (course there he may have been angrier about the actual locket being 'stolen' from his family rather than Merope. His love of treasure and all that ). Then in the graveyard Merope gets a pass and the "Muggle" is to blame. I'm hoping there might be more about the Merope/Lily connection, about the fact Voldemort can't process his mom's role in his life and then he's faced with Lily who makes a very different choice from Merope in that her death actually conferred love power to Harry instead of sentencing him to a life of no love. Just a wish on my part more than feeling canon is nailed down for this scenario. All in all, I lean toward the idea the whole Riddle/Merope story was mainly important to show the situation Tommy Riddle was born into. Before HBP, there was much speculation here about Voldemort's mum, that she was a powerful witch from a powerful Slytherin family perhaps. Or alternatively that Riddle Sr. took advantage of her, got her pregnant and left her high and dry. Then Harry finds out how pathetic the Slytherin line had actually become, with no power or wealth despite their pure-blood status. And Merope was certainly not a princess ala Narcissa (!), and was the one taking advantage of Riddle instead of the other way around. I found the story eye-opening. Jen, who likes psychology too much for her own good and holds out hope that Jungian ideas & alchemy will prove to be a major theme in the unveiling. From kchuplis at alltel.net Thu Jan 26 17:28:38 2006 From: kchuplis at alltel.net (Karen) Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2006 11:28:38 -0600 Subject: [HPforGrownups] You Must View This Videoclip! References: <20060126170341.QZON12594.ispmxaamta01-gx.alltel.net@n7a.bullet.scd.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <002601c6229d$f1856960$b301010a@ConsolidatedTelephone.local> No: HPFGUIDX 147079 Is this legit? Nothing shows up. Are we being spammed? ----- Original Message ----- From: rkdas To: HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com Sent: Thursday, January 26, 2006 11:03 AM Subject: [HPforGrownups] You Must View This Videoclip! Note: forwarded message attached. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] Before posting to any list, you MUST read the group's Admin File! http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/files/Admin_Files/HBF_Text__MUST_READ Please use accurate subject headings and snip unnecessary material from posts to which you're replying! ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS a.. Visit your group "HPforGrownups" on the web. b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: HPforGrownups-unsubscribe at yahoogroups.com c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From mgrantwich at yahoo.com Thu Jan 26 18:02:22 2006 From: mgrantwich at yahoo.com (Magda Grantwich) Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2006 10:02:22 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Why DADA for Snape? (WAS Re: Do any list members think...) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20060126180222.37193.qmail@web53108.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 147080 > zgirnius: > I have been thinking again about why Dumbledore gave the DADA > post to Snape. I think it was because Dumbledore, having recognized his mistake in OOTP in trying to keep Harry uninformed, had decided that he must make Harry aware of what needed to be done (ie, kill horcruxes), what his destiny was and teach him as much as he could. At the same time, with Harry preparing to move front and centre in the fight against Voldemort, there had to be a covert ally in Voldemort's camp and that would be Snape. Moving Snape to DADA would enable Snape to strap himself into the ejector seat that was the DADA curse and simply let it happen. This fits into my belief that with Harry informed of what he must do, the emphasis shifts from the Order to Harry, with the Order becoming increasingly irrelevant except as a group of decoys and a means to harass DE's. Dumbledore's injury from the ring indicated to him that he had to get a move on while he was still capable of teaching Harry. While he certainly didn't anticipate the final confrontation on the Astronomy Tower, I believe he and Snape had both considered Dumbledore's death as possible and what the next step should be if it happened. I certainly don't think they war-gamed the specific scenario in HBP but I do think they both agreed that in any dire situation nothing was more important than 1. Harry staying alive and 2. Snape seeming to be a loyal Voldemort man. And you can't get more loyal than by killing the man your DE rivals claim is the man you're truly loyal to. Bellatrix must have pitched a fit when she heard the news. So at the end of HBP, we have Snape at Voldemort's side having "proved" his loyalty with an amazing and unforeseen murder and all his DE rivals looking stupid as a result. Also we have Snape with the gratitude of the Malfoy family who now owe him one humdinger of a big favour in return. And Harry is alive and well and knows what he has to do. So far, the plan is still working despite unfortunate complications and unforeseen glitches. Magda __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com From vuurdame at xs4all.nl Thu Jan 26 18:40:48 2006 From: vuurdame at xs4all.nl (festuco) Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2006 18:40:48 -0000 Subject: Do any list members think Dumbledore might have asked Snape to kill him? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147081 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Steve" wrote: > Personally, I resist all speculation that Dumbledore and Snape sat > down and conspired for Snape to kill Dumbledore. That is too far > fetched and most unlikely. However, I don't have a problem with > Dumbledore impressing on Snape that Harry's life was of vital > important, and that Harry's life was more valuable than even his own > (Dumbledore's that is). Thank you, you have just given me a brainwave about the overheard conversation between DD and Snape. I have heard a lot about this being about Snape killing him and I never could see that. Yes I'm sure that DD was not afraid of death, but I'm equally sure that he knew his own worth in the fight against LV and would never plan to remove himself from that fight. However, I can imagin DD holding Snape to his promise to protect Harry at all cost, promise to guide him and help him if anything would happen to DD (and anything happening to DD was very likely because of his horcrux hunting). That is one tough thing to ask of Snape and I can see him not wanting to do that any longer, especially after too much Harry in his defense classes and too much Harry the potions genius. And I can see DD who is very forgiving be really stern here and not letting Snape out of this one. Gerry From vuurdame at xs4all.nl Thu Jan 26 18:41:09 2006 From: vuurdame at xs4all.nl (festuco) Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2006 18:41:09 -0000 Subject: Do any list members think Dumbledore might have asked Snape to kill him? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147082 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Steve" wrote: > Personally, I resist all speculation that Dumbledore and Snape sat > down and conspired for Snape to kill Dumbledore. That is too far > fetched and most unlikely. However, I don't have a problem with > Dumbledore impressing on Snape that Harry's life was of vital > important, and that Harry's life was more valuable than even his own > (Dumbledore's that is). Thank you, you have just given me a brainwave about the overheard conversation between DD and Snape. I have heard a lot about this being about Snape killing him and I never could see that. Yes I'm sure that DD was not afraid of death, but I'm equally sure that he knew his own worth in the fight against LV and would never plan to remove himself from that fight. However, I can imagin DD holding Snape to his promise to protect Harry at all cost, promise to guide him and help him if anything would happen to DD (and anything happening to DD was very likely because of his horcrux hunting). That is one tough thing to ask of Snape and I can see him not wanting to do that any longer, especially after too much Harry in his defense classes and too much Harry the potions genius. And I can see DD who is very forgiving be really stern here and not letting Snape out of this one. Gerry From agdisney at msn.com Thu Jan 26 20:07:25 2006 From: agdisney at msn.com (Andrea Grevera) Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2006 15:07:25 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] You Must View This Videoclip! References: <20060126170341.QZON12594.ispmxaamta01-gx.alltel.net@n7a.bullet.scd.yahoo.com> <002601c6229d$f1856960$b301010a@ConsolidatedTelephone.local> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147083 Is this legit? Nothing shows up. Are we being spammed? ----- Original Message ----- From: rkdas To: HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com Sent: Thursday, January 26, 2006 11:03 AM Subject: [HPforGrownups] You Must View This Videoclip! Note: forwarded message attached. Andie: I was wondering about this too. I didn't know if it was coming directly from the elves or if it was directed just to me. But 'rkdas' which comes up as who the message is from is on the member list so.... [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Thu Jan 26 20:22:28 2006 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2006 20:22:28 -0000 Subject: Snape's Confundus line in PoA (Was: Was the eavesdropper unimportant to Harry?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147084 Amiable Dorsai wrote: > Harry knows that Snape told Fudge that he, Ron and Hermione were Confunded. > Harry knows that Fudge subsequently ignored their stories. > What do you suppose Harry thinks? Carol responds: Quite possibly he doesn't think about it at all. We certainly have no evidence that he does. Or quite possibly, he realizes that, as Hermione points out earlier ("We attacked a teacher! We're going to be in so much trouble!"), Snape has actually prevented their expulsion by telling Fudge that they were Confunded. (Hogwarts students don't cast spells that knock out teachers with impunity. Only Snape's statement that they didn't know what they were doing prevents further inquiry.) The question, for me, is whether Snape actually believes this, wanting as he apparently does to believe that Sirius Black really is a mass murderer from whom Snape was attempting to rescue HRH, or whether he is lying to protect the kids, specifically Harry. (If Snape is DDM!, as I believe, he wants Harry at Hogwarts and under DD's protection despite his empty threats to expel Harry for offenses that he knows don't warrant expulsion or aren't within his jurisdiction.) We know from later books that Fudge doesn't need Snape's to make him believe that Harry's stories are farfetched (would *you* believe without any evidence that a pet rat was an unregistered Animagus believed dead for twelve years and now on his way to aid Lord Voldemort? I wouldn't!), or to make him want Harry expelled if he, Fudge, sees Harry as a threat (Harry's hearing in OoP). And Snape later (GoF) vouches for the truth of Harry's and Dumbledore's story, revealing his Dark Mark to Fudge as evidence that Voldemort has indeed returned. He didn't have to do that, nor can Fudge's recalcitrance be in any way attributed to him. Later, in HBP, Snape has an excellent reason for requesting, even demanding, Harry's expulsion, the Sectumsempra Curse that Harry performed on Draco, and he doesn't do so. He gives him multiple detentions instead, insuring that he stays in school, away from Voldemort. So, regardless of what Harry thinks (and I don't see any evidence that he thinks any more about Snape's words to Fudge in PoA after the incident is over), I don't think we can safely assume a sinister motive for Snape in telling Fudge that the kids were Confunded. And incidentally, this is not an instance of meltdown!Snape (Karen's term). Although he shouted furiously in the Shrieking Shack (as did Harry and Sirius Black), he doesn't behave angrily in front of Fudge until after he realizes that Harry has somehow helped Black escape. When he tells Fudge that the kids have been Confunded, that they attacked him *under a Confundus Curse*, he's perfectly calm. Suppose he had said, equally calmly, "I was trying to rescue them from the murderer and the werewolf and they attacked me." Imagine Fudge's reaction to *that*. Not only Harry but Ron and Hermione really would be in serious trouble--or Fudge would have extremely serious doubts about their sanity. After all, Fudge, like everyone else in the WW (including Snape at this point, IMO) thinks Sirius Black killed twelve Muggles and Peter Pettigrew and that he's after Harry. They attacked a teacher who was trying to help them? Let's cart them off to St. Mungo's. But Snape's story, whether he believes it himself or not, keeps the kids in school and unpunished. I can't see that the events in PoA make any significant difference in Harry's view of Snape (neither does GoF, which ought at least to show Snape's courage), in marked contrast to OoP and HBP, in which Harry sees Snape in an increasingly Black light, thanks largely to Sirius Black's suspicions and his death, which Harry for psychological reasons wants to blame on Snape. (And of course, there's the eavesdropper revelation and the events on the tower, but I won't go there now.) Nor do I see that Snape's words make any difference in Fudge's view of Harry. Far from making him think that Harry is deluded, they explain the seeming delusions by blaming them on a spell placed on Harry and two other students by an adult wizard. But the combination of Harry's stories in PoA and GoF and Fudge's own unwillingness to believe that Voldemort has returned (not to mention Rita Skeeter's articles) makes Fudge more and more willing to believe that Harry is unstable. Harry blames a great many things on Snape, but Fudge's belief that he, Harry, is delusional is not one of them. Carol, who actually snipped a paragraph from this long post! From bboyminn at yahoo.com Thu Jan 26 20:40:53 2006 From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2006 20:40:53 -0000 Subject: VA/H=Mx13+RP? (was: Was the eavesdropper unimportant to Harry?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147085 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "juli17ptf" wrote: > > Carol > > wrote: > > > And yet, setting aside the death of Dumbledore (which has > > > yet to be fully explained), Wormtail's sins against Harry > > > are much greater than Snape's. > > > > > Lupinlore wrote: > > Well, ... I disagree that even a DDM!Snape has sinned less > > against Harry than has Wormtail. He was at least as > > responsible for the Potter's deaths as Peter was. ... > > > > Julie: > Assuming DDM!Snape (as you are above) are you saying you think > telling Voldemort about the prophecy then REGRETTING it and > making a SINCERE effort to atone ... is equal to deliberately > betraying two of your closest friends to an almost certain > death? > > ... > > Maybe you actually believe they are equal but I don't. > > Julie > bboyminn: I think Julie is on to something here. Too many people are focused on the result of Snape's action rather than the actions themselves. All Snape did is pass some, in the moment, seemingly neutral information on to Voldemort. When Snape heard the Prophecy and passed it on, he had no way of knowing what it meant or how Voldemort would interpret it or use it. Further, since the details of that event and that night haven't been revealed in the book, we don't know that Voldemort concluded that Harry was the greater threat. He may have simply had the opportunity to attack Harry first. Under other circumstances, he could have just as easily attacked Neville first. Again, I'm not saying this is true, I'm saying we don't know. So, Snape passed a random bit of information on to Voldemort not knowing what it meant or how it would be interpreted. Petigrew knew full well the consequences of revealing his information. He knew that revealing the location fo the Potter's would mean their death. So, I see a very big gap between what Peter did and what Snape did. After the fact, it seems that Snape felt a great deal of regret and remorse when the consequences of the Prophecy became know. Lily had shown Snape kindness in a schoolyard world typically not known for it's kindness, and Snape owed a Life Debt to James. I won't go so far as to say that Snape was not without people who were friendly to him at school. Snape was magically powerful and academically gift, and that would surely draw admirers, even if those admirers were self-serving in their intent. But there is a big difference between people sucking up to their own advantage and true friends as is clearly illustrated in Peter Petigrew's action. Also, I can't help wonder about Snape's Life Debt to James. Certainly, it did not please him to be rescue by his nemesis, so we can understand his continued hostility toward James and Harry. But we know, or at least we are told, that there is a magical component to the Life Debt; an ancient and esoteric magic. Could that Life Debt have helped instill a true sense of guilt and regret in Snape? Is he plagued by the fact that a debt is owned but can never be repaid? Is he subconsciously bound by this ancient magic in a more powerful way than his social and political beliefs? I suspect ancient magic, like the Life Debt, is deeply subconscious and very subtle, and goes far beyond waving of wands, casting of spells, or brewing of potions. So, I think part of Snape's redemption is based on a sense of debt to Lily's kindness, even though he was probably very rarely kind to her, and to his Life Debt to James. His cosmic debt to these two individuals, is far more powerful that his personal policial beliefs. This debt touches him at his very core, it touches him in a place that he can't ignore. So, I see the events surrounding Snape as very plausable. He couldn't possibly know at the time how the Prophecy information would be interpreted and used, and that makes him very different from Wormtail. And, he has sufficient circumstance to where he could truly regret the results of his action; again, very different than Wormtail. However, I will add that my saying this doesn't absolve Snape of any guilt in the matter; he made a series of dark, dangerous, and anti-social choices that lead him to where he was at that time; he can only blame himself for those choices. But in the specific event of the Potter's death, he is certainly far less culpable than Wormtail. Just a few thoughts. Steve/bboyminn From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Thu Jan 26 21:08:56 2006 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2006 21:08:56 -0000 Subject: VA/H=Mx13+RP? (was: Was the eavesdropper unimportant to Harry?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147086 Steve: > So, I see the events surrounding Snape as very plausable. He couldn't > possibly know at the time how the Prophecy information would be > interpreted and used, and that makes him very different from Wormtail. Alla: I snipped a huge chunk of your post, because I just want to ask you this question. HOW else except Voldemort killing Prophecy couple and their baby could have Snape thought that information will be used. Honestly, Snape is an intelligent man. Are you arguing that he truly had no idea what Voldemort will do with this information? I guess I have a higher opinion of Snape's intelligence than you do. :-) Steve: > And, he has sufficient circumstance to where he could truly regret > the results of his action; again, very different than Wormtail. Alla: I won't argue that. If he indeed TRULY regretted what he did, that indeed makes him different than Wormtail, BUT up till now we only heard about Snape's regret from Dumbledore's mouth. Till I hear confirmation from Snape, I think I will reserve the judgment about his regret. JMO of course. Steve: > However, I will add that my saying this doesn't absolve Snape of any > guilt in the matter; he made a series of dark, dangerous, and > anti-social choices that lead him to where he was at that time; he can > only blame himself for those choices. But in the specific event of the > Potter's death, he is certainly far less culpable than Wormtail. Alla: I love Amiable Dorsai's comparison - Snape is as guilty in Potters deaths, as the man who fires gun in the crowd. He may have not known WHO will die by name, but IMO he absolutely knew that two people and baby are marked for death now. Wormtail is not even in the picture yet. Snape started all that, IMO. Alla From mjd at spillwaycable.com Thu Jan 26 20:49:52 2006 From: mjd at spillwaycable.com (mjanetd) Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2006 20:49:52 -0000 Subject: Draco and Harry (was:The GoF Train Scene - and beyond...) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147087 Betsy HP wrote: >> Picking on inferiors: Dudley does love to take down the very tiny. > (Fourteen beating on eleven is pretty pathetic, IMO.) Draco likes > to take down his rivals, whom he automatically classifies > as "inferior". > Reading your post made me realize that Draco is a female type bully. High school girls usually use words to torment their victims instead of fists. Draco is very good with an insult but never physically or magically attacks anyone unless he has his 2 bodyguards to do the dangerous work or his victims back is turned. janetd From bawilson at citynet.net Thu Jan 26 19:08:51 2006 From: bawilson at citynet.net (bawilson at citynet.net) Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2006 14:08:51 -0500 (EST) Subject: Merope's Selfishness Message-ID: <7839979.1138302531303.JavaMail.administrator@webmail> No: HPFGUIDX 147088 SSSusan: "But to call what she did at the orphanage "an act of utter selfishness"? I can't go that far. She had been left by Tom, she was flat broke, she had no family she could turn to for help, and no assets left. Did you not feel despair in what she did? desperation? depression? " BAW: She could at least have left him at a WIZARDLING orphanage; I'm sure they exist. (We don't know that they do, but we don't know that they don't, and every society must make SOME provision for babies and children whose parents can't or won't properly care for them.) BAW From mudblood68 at yahoo.de Thu Jan 26 21:49:55 2006 From: mudblood68 at yahoo.de (Claudia) Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2006 21:49:55 -0000 Subject: VA/H=Mx13+RP? (was: Was the eavesdropper unimportant to Harry?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147089 > Steve: > > > So, I see the events surrounding Snape as very plausable. He couldn't > > possibly know at the time how the Prophecy information would be > > interpreted and used, and that makes him very different from Wormtail. > > Alla: > > I snipped a huge chunk of your post, because I just want to ask you > this question. HOW else except Voldemort killing Prophecy couple and > their baby could have Snape thought that information will be used. > > Honestly, Snape is an intelligent man. Are you arguing that he truly > had no idea what Voldemort will do with this information? I guess I > have a higher opinion of Snape's intelligence than you do. :-) Claudia: I very firmly believe in DDMSnape and therefore I much more often agree to what Steve writes than to Alla's points of view but in this cast I can't help but agree to Alla. How on earth could an intelligent person with only a little knowledge of the "Dark Lord" think that he would react any differently than he did? I think it was even to be expected that he would kill all children born in July, not only in this year, but also in the years coming (just in case, you know.) But perhaps it is my Catholic upbringing making me to expect a killing, since I grew up hearing the story of King Herod killing all the babies in Bethlehem. So if anyone can come up with a way to explain how Snape could expect Voldemort to react differently to the Prophecy I'd be glad to hear it. (Or please point me to it, if this has been discussed before.) Claudia From Aisbelmon at hotmail.com Thu Jan 26 22:14:51 2006 From: Aisbelmon at hotmail.com (M.Clifford) Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2006 22:14:51 -0000 Subject: Merope's Selfishness In-Reply-To: <7839979.1138302531303.JavaMail.administrator@webmail> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147090 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, bawilson at c... wrote: > > SSSusan: > "But to call what she did at the orphanage "an act of utter selfishness"? I > can't go that far. She had been left by Tom, she was flat broke, she had no > family she could turn to for help, and no assets left. Did you not feel > despair in what she did? desperation? depression? " > > > BAW: > She could at least have left him at a WIZARDLING orphanage; I'm sure they > exist. (We don't know that they do, but we don't know that they don't, and > every society must make SOME provision for babies and children whose parents > can't or won't properly care for them.) Valky: Why would she do that after having been raised by Marvolo Gaunt? He was *all* wizard, and he never let people forget it, he was also cruel and violent toward Merope all her life. Merope's concept of Wizard will have been forever coloured by her experiences with her father. Tom Riddle was also cruel to her, but she loved him through his flaws, he was clean and gentlemanly unlike her father, and what is most probable in Merope's case is that she honestly believed Muggles were better than wizards and that she was doing the right thing for young Tom by keeping him away from the world that had dealt her so much cruelty. From darkchylde_18 at hotmail.com Thu Jan 26 22:22:54 2006 From: darkchylde_18 at hotmail.com (darkchylde_18) Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2006 22:22:54 -0000 Subject: Do any list members think Dumbledore might have asked Snape to kill him? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147091 Quick_silver71 wrote: > Darn your right, sorry about that, I wasn't remembering it rightly. > Although Dumbledore did have several seconds and their flight up to > the Tower to ponder what was going on. Harry also questions > Dumbledore's orders on top of the Tower so there is a small time > delay. The fact that Dumbledore doesn't tell Harry to flee or > prepare to fight when footsteps are heard and the fact that he > freezes Harry makes me think that Dumbledore knows who is coming up > the stairs at least and that Dumbledore does have a plan to deal > with that person. > > Still at this part of Dumbledore's decisions must have been time > constrained. > > > I know that DD seems omniscient inside the castle but not outside of it. I don't think he knew who it was coming up the stairs and wanted to keep Harry safe. We all know that Harry acts first and thinks later. All DD knew was that DE's were in the castle. I'm not even quite sure how Draco knew that DD would be on the Tower. Oh yeah, Rosmerta. How could she not have told him that Harry was with him? I think DD froze Harry to the spot because he believed the safest course of action would be to keep Harry with him based on how unpredictable the situation was. Someone in discussion said that they supposed Legilimency was going on between Dumbledore and Snape and I wholly agree about that. This is a reputed hard skill to master and I don't think any of the other DE's would have realized what was happening. And because this was Harry's POV, I don't think he connected the dots. Not adding much, but there's my opinion. -Darkchylde From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Thu Jan 26 22:46:21 2006 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2006 22:46:21 -0000 Subject: How to contstruct an ESE!plot was Re: The Secret Revealed! ESE!Arthur In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147092 Pippin > Peter should have known that James's friends would go mad and > seek revenge? After twelve years? And Lupin wasn't mad, the > whole point of discrimination against werewolves being mere > prejudice is that when they're not transformed they're just > as much in control of themselves as other people are. Alla: Are you saying that NOTHING in what Lupin learned that night, the revelations which made his whole world go upside down, could have made him just a little bit upset? The fact that the friend who he thought was the betrayer was really not and the one who really betrayed the Potters is alive and well? I mean, I would have been more than a little shaken up by such revelations. If you are basing your interpretation that Lupin was not upset on the fact that he is not shaking with rage or something like that, I submit that it is NOT in Lupin's character to shake with rage and it is perfectly in Sirius' character to show that he is upset. IMO of course. I mean, I love Sirius' character, always did, but I think Remus could be just as upset as Sirius and maybe even a bit more since he learned just NOW that Peter is alive, he did not have time to process the information at all. I mean, of course Sirius was more traumatised, but I have no idea why you are so sure that Remus could not have been upset that night too. JMO of course. Pippin > Lupin's initial appearance, a stranger handing out candy to children > on a train -- so much for worrying that kids will feel betrayed, isn't > that exactly the 'friendly' stranger they've been warned about? Alla: Not in my book. Sorry! This is the stranger, whose very first act when he starts actually acting is to fight darkness of the Dementors with light of the Patronus. Not the symbolism I would picture evil character to be introduced with. JMO, Alla, who also thinks that basically every character of the canon can be interpreted as ESE! if the writer is so desires and who for example does not think that Mcgonagall is ESE despite the brilliance of Elkins' post From horridporrid03 at yahoo.com Thu Jan 26 23:24:18 2006 From: horridporrid03 at yahoo.com (horridporrid03) Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2006 23:24:18 -0000 Subject: Draco and Harry In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147093 > >>Betsy Hp: > > However, there is a certain significance, at least IMO, in the > > fact that Draco doesn't *knowingly* insult Harry or his mother. > > > >>Alla: > I don't understand what are you trying to say. What difference > does it make that Draco does not "knowingly" insults Harry or his > mother? > Betsy Hp: It's the difference between a character purposefully being an antagonist and a character tripping into the role through misunderstanding and misspeaking. The first is pretty straight up and down, but the second leaves all sorts of interesting wiggle room. It's the space JKR left herself by going with the second option that I find so significant. > >>Alla: > If you do argue that, doesn't it make Draco worse person since he > is prejudiced aagainst ALL Muggleborns not just Lily Evans? Betsy Hp: No. Just a more ignorant one. And ignorance can be easily fixed. That's part of the reason why it was necessary for Harry to *not* befriend Draco too early on in the series, I think. Because through his association with Harry, Draco would have had his ignorant beliefs challanged. And HBP wouldn't have been nearly as interesting. > >>Amiable Dorsai: > > Yes, I'm sure that Harry will soon come to his senses and realize > what a swell fellow Draco is and will ask him on bended knee to > forget the past and be friends. Betsy Hp: I'm just hoping Harry comes to his senses and realizes what a swell person Draco *could be*. Though I also think it'd be better if it was more a meeting of equals rather than either boy kneeling to the other. More of a Slytherin/Gryffindor symbolic healing thing (the Sorting Hat insists!). > >>RB (in response to Amiable Dorsai's quotes): > *ROFL* Thank you. Thank you for sharing the "highlights" of Draco > Malfoy's career as THE class clown at Hogwarts. These glorious > moments of his made up over half of the reason I love this little > bastard so much, for I have a rubbish sort of humour and his > supposedly "nasty" remarks managed to make me laugh 90% of the > time. Betsy Hp: Draco can be amusing, can't he? Though Amiable Dorsai left out one of my favorite lines about Ron "mutilating his roots," (to paraphrase) in PoA. > >>RP: > I won't butt in your discussion with Betsy about Harry's potential > friendship with Draco though, since I have a different perception > about it from both of you :-) Betsy Hp: Ooh, you can't just hint and run! Please, share. > >>janetd: > Reading your post made me realize that Draco is a female type > bully. High school girls usually use words to torment their > victims instead of fists. Draco is very good with an insult but > never physically or magically attacks anyone unless he has his 2 > bodyguards to do the dangerous work or his victims back is turned. Betsy Hp: Draco is all about the verbal attack, that's true. I don't recall him attacking anyone physically, or ordering Crabbe and Goyle to physically attack anyone though. And Draco did take Harry on, one on one, face to face, in the bathroom in HBP. But that's not Draco's usual style and is probably a sign of his increasing desperation. Harry, Ron, Hermione, heck even Neville are more likely to get into a brawl than Draco. Something I've noticed though, Draco is fairly one note with his verbal attacks. His "Weasley is our King" song was a moment of genius on his part I think, but his constant harping on Hermione being muggleborn looses its zest after, well, the first time really. I mean, can't he think of a different angle? It certainly doesn't do much to Hermione. Ron seems more gifted in the verbal slings and arrows department, especially by HBP where he seems able to cut someone with a few well placed words and barely a thought. Which is strange, because it's not how I'd have called it. Yeah, no idea where I'm going with this, just thinking about Draco's skills as a verbal bully. I'll stop rambling now. Betsy Hp From foxmoth at qnet.com Thu Jan 26 23:51:04 2006 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2006 23:51:04 -0000 Subject: How to contstruct an ESE!plot was Re: The Secret Revealed! ESE!Arthur In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147094 > Pippin > > > Peter should have known that James's friends would go mad and > > seek revenge? After twelve years? And Lupin wasn't mad, the > > whole point of discrimination against werewolves being mere > > prejudice is that when they're not transformed they're just > > as much in control of themselves as other people are. > > Alla: > > Are you saying that NOTHING in what Lupin learned that night, the > revelations which made his whole world go upside down, could have > made him just a little bit upset? Pippin: Upset?! I daresay he was upset. And that's an excuse for murder, is it? Funny, you don't seem to be so lenient where Snape is concerned. Wasn't his world being turned upside down too? Come to think of it, Sirius had agreed to go to the castle, as long as Peter came too, but Lupin doesn't say, oh no, we mustn't kill him, let's take him up to the castle like you said before. And then he makes ready to kill a man who's begging for mercy, though not from him, you'll notice. That makes me think there's hope for Peter. At least he had the self-respect not to beg for his life from Lupin. Now, if he can manage some of that in front of Voldemort himself.... It is refreshing to encounter a villain who doesn't rant, but "You should have known..." is a gloat, which is not very goodguy like. And that reminds me, don't you think it's strange that Snape, who never misses a chance to gloat, didn't gloat over Dumbledore? If he was really filled with hatred and revulsion, wouldn't he have made a speech about it? Gloated a little? Basked in the glory? Can you imagine Snape missing a chance to do that? What could have come over him? ;-) > Pippin > > > Lupin's initial appearance, a stranger handing out candy to children > > on a train -- so much for worrying that kids will feel betrayed, > isn't that exactly the 'friendly' stranger they've been warned about? > > > Alla: > > Not in my book. Sorry! This is the stranger, whose very first act > when he starts actually acting is to fight darkness of the Dementors > with light of the Patronus. Not the symbolism I would picture evil > character to be introduced with. Pippin: His first act was to stand there arguing with it, which Dumbledore tells us never works. He doesn't get rid of it until after Harry passes out. Not very nice. And what was it doing there anyway? Who ordered it to invade the train? Pippin From belviso at attglobal.net Thu Jan 26 23:48:55 2006 From: belviso at attglobal.net (Magpie) Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2006 18:48:55 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: VA/H=Mx13+RP? (was: Was the eavesdropper unimportant to Harry?) References: Message-ID: <009b01c622d3$12578fd0$af78400c@Spot> No: HPFGUIDX 147095 > Claudia: > How on earth could an intelligent person with only a little knowledge > of the "Dark Lord" think that he would react any differently than he > did? I think it was even to be expected that he would kill all > children born in July, not only in this year, but also in the years > coming (just in case, you know.) Magpie: I could be wrong but I assume when people talk about Snape "not knowing" they mean that when the prophecy became "real" to him he saw that it was something he didn't want to do. I mean, from his pov think of it this way. He's on Voldemort's side. His goal is to support him. (Sometimes, as weird as it sounds, people do have trouble not thinking that villains underneath it all really see everything the same way the heroes do and so view their own actions the same way as the heroes do.) So think of if Snape was working for DD and he heard a prophecy that said that someone who would destroy him could be found in such and such a place. He'd naturally pass that information on as a supporter of DD. Somebody's going to kill you--here he is. Naturally Snape knew that this meant this "one" whoever he was would then become the enemy and be taken care of, but his goal is to take away obstacles to Voldemort's power. It's not like when he finds out it's, "Oh my! This means Voldemort might do something to the baby I just said was going to be born and his family! How could I have known that?" It was more that yeah, he saw this as an obstacle that would be taken care of in a potentially violent way, but when the reality of what this meant sunk in in human terms, for whatever reason Snape (maybe) thought this was something he thought was wrong. Sure it would have been better if he'd thought that before he told Voldemort about the prophecy, but it's possibly also a lot better than the alternative, which is that he never thought it was a bad idea. -m From kking0731 at gmail.com Fri Jan 27 00:59:31 2006 From: kking0731 at gmail.com (Kathy King) Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2006 19:59:31 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] How to contstruct an ESE!plot was Re: The Secret Revealed! ESE!Arthur In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147096 > Pippin > > > Lupin's initial appearance, a stranger handing out candy to children > > on a train -- so much for worrying that kids will feel betrayed, > isn't that exactly the 'friendly' stranger they've been warned about? > > Alla: > > Not in my book. Sorry! This is the stranger, whose very first act > when he starts actually acting is to fight darkness of the Dementors > with light of the Patronus. Not the symbolism I would picture evil > character to be introduced with. Snow: The first thing I thought of when I read this was Moody/Crouch Jr. in GOF turning Draco into a ferret. Real bad guys do nice things to worm their way into their victim's good graces by appearing to be at the victim's defense in order to gain their trust. Voldemort himself recruits his followers (dementors, giants, werewolves like Fenrir), in much the same way, with offerings the Ministry would never consider. That's the way of a really 'good' bad person. No one suspected Moody and in fact there are still readers who really liked the way that he acted despite the fact that in the end he proclaims his utter faithfulness to his master. Kids are easily manipulated by various degrees of false proclamations of caring like in the example Pippin gave of offering a child candy; all kids know that one though "don't take candy from strangers". Funny how Harry appeared to be a bit hesitant to eat it though, must have been all those years growing up as a muggle hearing that commercial. Snow [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From celizwh at intergate.com Fri Jan 27 01:12:52 2006 From: celizwh at intergate.com (houyhnhnm102) Date: Fri, 27 Jan 2006 01:12:52 -0000 Subject: How to contstruct an ESE!plot was Re: The Secret Revealed! ESE!Arthur In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147097 Pippin: > His first act was to stand there arguing with it, > which Dumbledore tells us never works. He doesn't > get rid of it until after Harry passes out. Not very > nice. And what was it doing there anyway? Who ordered > it to invade the train? houyhnhnm: And what was he doing on the train in the first place? It's a strange way for a fully qualified wizard to travel. Maybe he was too poor to own a broom, but why not apparate or travel by floo? From bboyminn at yahoo.com Fri Jan 27 01:32:33 2006 From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Fri, 27 Jan 2006 01:32:33 -0000 Subject: VA/H=Mx13+RP? Snape's Culpability? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147098 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Claudia" wrote: > > > Steve: > > > > > So, I see the events surrounding Snape as very plausable. He > > > couldn't possibly know at the time how the Prophecy > > > information would be interpreted and used, and that makes > > > him very different from Wormtail. > > > > Alla: > > > > ... HOW else except Voldemort killing Prophecy couple and > > their baby could have Snape thought that information will > > be used. > > > > Honestly, Snape is an intelligent man. Are you arguing that he > > truly had no idea what Voldemort will do ... > > > Claudia: > I very firmly believe in DDMSnape and therefore I much more often > agree to what Steve writes than to Alla's points of view but in this > cast I can't help but agree to Alla. > > How on earth could an intelligent person with only a little > knowledge of the "Dark Lord" think that he would react any > differently than he did? > > ...edited... bboyminn: First and foremost, I am not absolving Snape. I'm not saying he is blameless. He did what he did. However, intelligent as he is, he really couldn't predict how Voldemort would use the Prophecy information. The prophecy is vague and subject to interpretation. Now we all know that Snape was a Death Eater, and DE's are certainly not skipping around the country side handing out Daisies, whistling a merry tune, and hitting people with marshmallows. These are seriously nasty people, and Snape would certainly expect 'nasty' results, but he couldn't predict what or when any thing would happen from the vague information in the partial prophecy he heard. Several people in the books have suggested that it would have been smarter for Voldemort to have waited; to have waited and found out more details then planned his course of action. So, Snape's action might not have had consequences for years to come. Also, he couldn't know in the moment who the Prophecy referred to. At the time, Snape did his job, he got information and passed it on. He couldn't really control or influence how or when that information would be used. YES, he knew there was a likelihood that at some time his information MIGHT produce NASTY result, but at that point in time, he really couldn't preceive the nature, time, or degree of the nastiness. Again, Snape was a Death Eater, he acted like a DE, he did a bad thing, and he certainly can't be blameless for that. But Wormtail knew SPECIFICALLY what would happen when he /betrayed/ the Potters. There was no vague imprecise non-specific nastiness in his action. He knew full well that he was signing a death warant for Harry and his parents. I say /that/ direct knowledge of specific consequences does make a difference. Again, just because I see Snape culpability as different from Wormtails doesn't mean he is not responsible for the consequences of his actions, nor does it mean that he could /specifically/ anticipate the result of his actions. To use a modern day analogy, does the intelligence agent in the field who gathered information on Weapons of Mass Destruction in the Middle East have blood on his hands? Is he personally responsible for how the leaders of his country used the information he gathered? Without a doubt at some point in the future, his information would produce nasty results. He certainly isn't blameless, he is in a /nasty/ business afteral, but at the same time, I don't think we can say that this field agent brought us to war. That was the decision of our leaders. Snape bears some responsibility in the Potter's deaths, he is afteral in a /nasty/ business, but I don't think he should be held responsible for the choices made by Voldemort. On the other hand, Wormtail clearly and unquestionably conspired with Voldemort with the known and sure intented of killing the Potters. Here there is no ambiguity. Wormtail's action are just as direct as Voldemort's in leading to the imminent and immediate death of the Potter's; he acted with that specific intent. Not saying any of this cast of characters is blameless, just trying to keep their degree and nature of blame in prespective. Steve/bboyminn From rdoliver30 at yahoo.com Thu Jan 26 21:23:51 2006 From: rdoliver30 at yahoo.com (lupinlore) Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2006 21:23:51 -0000 Subject: VA/H=Mx13+RP? (was: Was the eavesdropper unimportant to Harry?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147099 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "juli17ptf" wrote: > > As for Snape's methodical verbal/emotional abuse of Harry, again > are you saying that his abuse of Harry is EQUAL to Peter's murder > of Cedric, murder of 12 other innocent people and very willing > resurrection of a psychopath? VA/H=Mx13+RP? (Where VA=verbal abuse, > H=Harry, M=murder, RP=resurrected psychopath). > Absolutely and totally yes. In that neither of them can be defended and neither of them, given a universe that functions on at least rough karmic laws (and yes, we aren't totally sure about the Potterverse yet) can escape severe punishment for their reprehensible and unforgivable actions. Oh, you forgot a factor, which is the time scale of Snape's constant and methodical abuse. Let's see, given that each of Wormtail's actions take about ten seconds, and Snape abuses Harry for at least three periods a week, and adding detentions, that would give Snape's actions a weight of -- - hmmm, carry the one --- 748,800. So the real equation would be: (VA/H)(748,800) = or > 13M+RP. Lupinlore From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Fri Jan 27 02:50:47 2006 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Fri, 27 Jan 2006 02:50:47 -0000 Subject: How to make Remus look evil , when he is not /Draco and Harry In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147100 >> Pippin: > Upset?! I daresay he was upset. And that's an excuse for murder, is > it? Funny, you don't seem to be so lenient where Snape is concerned. > Wasn't his world being turned upside down too? Alla: No, Pippin, it is not an excuse for murder, but IMO it sure is an excuse for attempt to avenge his dead friends and one alive, who suffered unjustly for twelve years, because the traitor framed him. IMO of course. And I am not sure what are you talking about "Snape's world being turned upside down"? Are you talking about Tower events or Shrieking Shack? Because if you are talking about Tower events, then I think that IF Snape's world was indeed being turned upside down, Snape is the one who did the "turning upside down" part and have to pay the consequences. Unless you are saying of course that Snape for some reason had a burning need to exercise revenge on Dumbledore. I may be more lenient on poor Severus then, but those revenge reasons are better be good :-). Oh, I know one - Albus saved him from Azkaban, while Snape wanted to spend time there in the same cell where Sirius was. :-) Never mind, slasher in me talking. :) Peter is the one (in my book of course) who shook Remus' world that night and I definitely understand the desire of revenge. It is a GOOD thing that Harry stopped Remus and Sirius that night, of course. But even Harry, who I firmly believe has a kind soul, does not stop them to show leniency to Peter, he is bringing Peter to Hogwarts in hope that he would be given Dementor Kiss, so I submit that Harry does not have much pity for Peter either, just the desire for justice to be served without Remus and Sirius becoming murderers. All IMO of course. Pippin; >And that reminds me, don't you think it's strange that > Snape, who never misses a chance to gloat, didn't gloat over > Dumbledore? If he was really filled with hatred and revulsion, > wouldn't he have made a speech about it? Gloated a little? > Basked in the glory? Can you imagine Snape missing a chance > to do that? What could have come over him? ;-) Alla: No, Pippin, I don't find it strange at all, if what I believe is true - namely that the underlying reason for Snape killing was saving his own life ( I don't know what he is planning to do with it - to serve bad or good guys), then Snape did not have TIME to gloat. He wanted to leave Hogwarts and fast, before Order may capture him or kill him. So, nope, I think it is very believable. > Pippin: > His first act was to stand there arguing with it, which Dumbledore tells > us never works. He doesn't get rid of it until after Harry passes out. Not > very nice. And what was it doing there anyway? Who ordered it to > invade the train? Alla: Heeee, I think I know your answer to that question. :-) I will pass for now. > > >>Alla: > > I don't understand what you are trying to say. What difference > > does it make that Draco does not "knowingly" insults Harry or his > > mother? > > > > Betsy Hp: > It's the difference between a character purposefully being an > antagonist and a character tripping into the role through > misunderstanding and misspeaking. The first is pretty straight up > and down, but the second leaves all sorts of interesting wiggle > room. It's the space JKR left herself by going with the second > option that I find so significant. Alla: OK, I am sorry, but I need more clarification, if you don't mind. I am guessing we will disagree anyways, but I have no idea what are you talking about. What space JKR left for herself? She portrays Draco as prejudiced against ALL muggleborns. What wiggle room she gave herself by portraying Draco that way? I think that if she portrays him as prejudiced against ONE person, Lily Evans, wouldn't THAT mean that she left wiggle room for herself - as in she could explain the specific reasons why Draco was prejudiced against Lily , maybe that could be indeed misunderstanding between Harry and Draco and then it could be clarified between them. Right now it is exceptionally clear ( well to me anyway) that Draco is THAT kind of person, the one who thinks that Mugglebornes are the "wrong kind". > > >>Alla: > > If you do argue that, doesn't it make Draco worse person since he > > is prejudiced against ALL Muggleborns not just Lily Evans? > > Betsy Hp: > No. Just a more ignorant one. And ignorance can be easily fixed. Alla: But you were saying above that JKR left a wiggle room for herself because Draco specifically does not insult Lily. Here you seem to agree that it makes Draco MORE ignorant person. So, let me ask you again, why do you think it is better that Draco insults all Muggleborns than if he would specifically insults Lily? Betsy Hp: > That's part of the reason why it was necessary for Harry to *not* > befriend Draco too early on in the series, I think. Because through > his association with Harry, Draco would have had his ignorant > beliefs challenged. And HBP wouldn't have been nearly as > interesting. Alla: But that is why Harry did not want association with Draco, no? BECAUSE of his beliefs? > Betsy Hp: > I'm just hoping Harry comes to his senses and realizes what a swell > person Draco *could be*. Alla: What are you basing your assumption on that Draco could be a "swell person"? Because even though I adored Amiable Dorsai's quote collections, I really did not see a SINGLE one, if we were to look at things seriously of course, which showed to me how "swell" Draco could be in the future. IMO of course. Betsy Hp: > Something I've noticed though, Draco is fairly one note with his > verbal attacks. His "Weasley is our King" song was a moment of > genius on his part I think, but his constant harping on Hermione > being muggleborn looses its zest after, well, the first time > really. I mean, can't he think of a different angle? It certainly > doesn't do much to Hermione. Alla: So what if he is fairly one note with his attacks? His one note ( which is not really one note, but Ok, he is repetitive sometimes) is IMO of the worst kind, the ones which can lead to genocide of Muggleborns. As I said in the past - my RL metaphor for Draco's prejudice is anti- Semitism ( and I know it is different for everybody), from my experience people who spitted the what I see as equivalent for "Mudblood" in the books did not just say it because they thought that they are Okay with just saying things about Jews. They wanted Jews to be shined from good education, good jobs, etc, etc and of course they wanted Jews just leave the country . I don't see Draco's attacks as blabbering of the little boy, I see it as his ideological program, sort of where he stands on that issue and I find it the most horrible verbal attacks in the books - NOT "Weasley the king" or 'Potter stinks", but his "Mudblood" and they will be killed ( Mudbloods, I mean) Alla From wrigs21 at yahoo.com Fri Jan 27 03:18:38 2006 From: wrigs21 at yahoo.com (wrigs21) Date: Fri, 27 Jan 2006 03:18:38 -0000 Subject: Does anyone have any ideas as to how Snape was spying for the OOTP? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147101 I have heard "speculation" that perhaps Snape is an animagus......a bat-like creature to be exact. I suppose this would be an easy way for him to disguise his presence.... Wrigs21 From kchuplis at alltel.net Fri Jan 27 04:13:58 2006 From: kchuplis at alltel.net (Karen) Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2006 22:13:58 -0600 Subject: [HPforGrownups] How to make Remus look evil , when he is not /Draco and Harry In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <56CCA184-8EEB-11DA-A1F7-000393B04DDE@alltel.net> No: HPFGUIDX 147102 alla: On Thursday, January 26, 2006, at 08:50 PM, dumbledore11214 wrote: > But even Harry, who I firmly believe has a kind soul, does > not stop them to show leniency to Peter, he is bringing Peter to > Hogwarts in hope that he would be given Dementor Kiss, so I submit > that Harry does not have much pity for Peter either, just the desire > for justice to be served without Remus and Sirius becoming > murderers. kchuplis: Just thought I'd point out that Harry thinks PP would be taken to Azkaban. I really don't think he was thinking the demenotor's would be smooching anyone that night (he finds THAT out later). pg. 376 "You're the only person who has the right to decide, Harry," said Black. "But think...think what he did...." "He can go to Azkaban," Harry repeated. "If anyone deserves that place, he does...." From stevejjen at earthlink.net Fri Jan 27 04:39:29 2006 From: stevejjen at earthlink.net (Jen Reese) Date: Fri, 27 Jan 2006 04:39:29 -0000 Subject: How to contstruct an ESE!plot was Re: The Secret Revealed! ESE!Arthur In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147103 > Pippin: > > His first act was to stand there arguing with it, > > which Dumbledore tells us never works. He doesn't > > get rid of it until after Harry passes out. Not very > > nice. And what was it doing there anyway? Who ordered > > it to invade the train? > houyhnhnm: > And what was he doing on the train in the first place? It's a strange > way for a fully qualified wizard to travel. Maybe he was too poor to > own a broom, but why not apparate or travel by floo? Jen: Dumbledore. Asked him to ride knowing he could deal with a dementor if there was any trouble. That's not actually canon but it seems like it could be. :) As for the chocolate, Pomfrey and Mcgongall pretty much verified giving chocolate to kids after a dementor attack is considered a plausible DADA strategy and not the acts of a criminal. The sneakoscope going off, the chocolate, and heck, practically everything Lupin does in POA is pretty much equivalent to Guilty!Snape in book one and Karkaroff/Crouch Sr./Bagman in Book 4--ambiguous red herrings to keep Harry and the reader off the scent of the real culprit. JKR is making a habit out of weakening the adult characters to strenghten the hero. Jen, on a kick of thinking things will be fairly straighforward in the end and wondering how the series will read 5, 10, 20 years from now when many of the mysteries are no more. From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Fri Jan 27 05:06:03 2006 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Fri, 27 Jan 2006 05:06:03 -0000 Subject: =?iso-8859-1?q?Re:_Lord_Voldemort's_Six_Horcruxes=3F_Are_Dumbledore=92s_Opinions_Wrong=3F_(LVs_SHADOW?= In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147104 Brothergib wrote: > Interesting, but Voldemort is not snakelike when he reemerges from > his long 'exile' when he conversed with 'the very worst of our kind'. > I think we can safely assume that when Voldemort met with DD at > Hogwarts, he had four Horcruxes, so was already fairly safe from > death. Why would he then start using snake venom to protect his > physical body? Protect it from what? It was clearly ineffective > against the Avada Kedavra! Carol: I agree that LV had not yet made Nagini into a Horcrux when he had the DADA interview. But are you sure that he was actually recruiting followers other than his few old friends at that point? Maybe he still had some traveling to do--and some Horcruxes to make. And he could have made Nagini a Horcrux at any time between that interview and Godric's Hollow. He could easily have had the fifth (Ravenclaw) Horcrux as well, with Nagini as the sixth. (I think it's that small point on which DD is wrong; he thinks that Nagini was made into a Horcrux after Voldemort's body was restored, but I thinkit had to be sooner.) You say that he wasn't snakelike when he returned from his travels, but you're assuming that his travels were over when he had the DADA interview. But do we know when that interview occurred? How long or short a time passed between that interview and the beginning of VW1? Even if that interview (when his features were blurred and he had created at least four Horcruxes) occurred immediately before VW1 began, he still had eleven years to go before Godric's Hollow--plenty of time for more murders and more Horcruxes. I think he must have been snakelike (as the result of Nagini as Horcrux) before Godric's Hollow for two reasons. First, the DEs in the graveyard scene don't react at all to his appearance. This is Voldemort restored, Voldemort as they knew him. And second, the face that appears out of Quirrell's head in SS/PS is snakelike. At that point, Quirrell is drinking unicorn blood to sustain his master, but snake venom only comes into the picture when its used to create his fetal body and provide "milk" for baby!mort. As I said in an earlier thread, she must already have been a Horcrux when Pettigrew found him if he could use her venom to restore Voldemort's body. And Voldie was in no shape to create a Horcrux himself between his vaporization and PP's finding him in Albania (including the interval in Quirrell's head). He didn't even have a wand, and a wand is required to create a Horcrux. So, IMO, it had to have happened before Godric's Hollow. Carol, not sure that she's arguing clearly here, but sure that Nagini was a Horcrux *before* Godric's Hollow From stevejjen at earthlink.net Fri Jan 27 05:10:52 2006 From: stevejjen at earthlink.net (Jen Reese) Date: Fri, 27 Jan 2006 05:10:52 -0000 Subject: Euthanasia or magical solution? (Re: Do any list members think Dumbledore..) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147105 Ceridwen: > Would JKR introduce euthanasia into a series that is supposed to > be for growing children? She has already introduced senseless > death, children losing their parents, people being tortured into > insanity, and other things that, recently, people have thought to > be too nasty for kids to deal with. However, euthanasia is a > current political hot-potato, widely debated with no concensus in > a child's real world. Would she seek to influence children to > perhaps go against their parents by bringing it up and offering > this solution to them? Jen: I think a straightforward "Dumbledore asked to be killed" solution (regardless of how it came about) would definitely put euthanasia on the table. I don't think JKR would shy away from this but *could* see her having a more inventive solution than simply a Muggle one. Why make it plain vanilla when it could be something deeply magical? It wouldn't be the first time Harry doesn't understand what he's seeing because the WW works in mysterious ways. He didn't know he was creating a life debt from Wormtail by showing him mercy; he didn't know he had to participate in the tournament because of a 'binding magical contract' until Dumbledore laid it out. He didn't know how Lily's sacrifice protected him, how Voldemort could get inside his head, why he had to live with the Dursleys and so on. None of us still know why LV taking Harry's blood was so critical. I don't believe JKR will introduce a new concept into the series, but ancient magic has never really been explained. I doubt it can be put into words completely (convenient, that ) although there could be something going on which is Dumbledore through and through. If anyone would know a way out on the tower, he would. Maybe I'd just like to think his dying act strengthened Harry and undermined Voldemort since he gave over a good portion of his life to that end. Perhaps the gleam is even connected to the tower, something Dumbledore put together in GOF which gave him an idea for the future. Voldemort thinks shedding blood weakens his enemies and it would be so fitting if Dumbledore shedding his own blood, like Lily, proved to be important for defeating Voldemort in the end. Jen From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Fri Jan 27 06:17:31 2006 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Fri, 27 Jan 2006 06:17:31 -0000 Subject: VA/H=Mx13+RP? (was: Was the eavesdropper unimportant to Harry?) In-Reply-To: <009b01c622d3$12578fd0$af78400c@Spot> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147106 Magpie wrote: > I could be wrong but I assume when people talk about Snape "not knowing" they mean that when the prophecy became "real" to him he saw that it was something he didn't want to do. > > I mean, from his pov think of it this way. He's on Voldemort's side. His goal is to support him. (Sometimes, as weird as it sounds, people do have trouble not thinking that villains underneath it all really see everything the same way the heroes do and so view their own actions the same way as the heroes do.) So think of if Snape was working for DD and he heard a prophecy that said that someone who would destroy him could be found in such and such a place. He'd naturally pass that information on as a supporter of DD. > Somebody's going to kill you--here he is. > > Naturally Snape knew that this meant this "one" whoever he was would then become the enemy and be taken care of, but his goal is to take away obstacles to Voldemort's power. It's not like when he finds out it's, "Oh my! This means Voldemort might do something to the baby I just said was going to be born and his family! How could I have known that?" It was more that yeah, he saw this as an obstacle that would be taken care of in a potentially violent way, but when the reality of what this meant sunk in in human terms, for whatever reason Snape (maybe) thought this was something he > thought was wrong. Sure it would have been better if he'd thought that before he told Voldemort about the prophecy, but it's possibly also a lot better than the alternative, which is that he never thought it was a bad idea. Carol responds: If I understand correctly what you're saying, I agree with you. The Prophecy incident occurred some months before Harry was born. Snape was a twenty-year-old DE who happened to overhear a Prophecy concerning apparent danger to his master. (He couldn't have been there on purpose to overhear a Prophecy. He probably didn't even know there would be a job interview since it was not the end of summer.) He follows Dumbledore, overhears part of the interview and part of the Prophecy and is kicked out of the bar. Almost certainly he Apparated to LV and reported what he had heard without thinking about what it said. (More likely, given who he was reporting to, he was thinking about rewards and punishments. Would he be rewarded for his information or punished because it was incomplete.) I don't think he thought at all about what the Prophecy meant. Even those of us who have gone over it and over it can't agree on what it means. I very much doubt that he thought, "Oh. The Dark Lord is going to kill some baby." He, young Snape, had simply overheard a Prophecy about someone who might have the power to defeat his master, and he quite reasonably thought that his master should know. Quite possibly Voldemort's reaction took him by surprise. Instead of regarding the Prophecy as a vague future threat that might come to pass when some kid born in July became old enough to threaten him, Voldemort was worried about as yet unborn babies. Maybe young Snape started worrying then, too, even watching the birth announcements. At some point--it could not have been immediately--he realized that the child (assuming that the Prophecy meant *this* particular July) cpild only be Harry Potter or Neville Longbottom. He may have gone to Dumbledore immediately, or he may have waited till Voldemort chose Harry over Neville. But the point is, he did go to Dumbledore, when it became clear to him who the child was and what Voldemort intended to do. And he could not have known that when he heard the Prophecy or when he reported it. So I agree with Steve (and Magpie?): Snape's crime in reporting the Prophecy is nowhere near as significant as Wormtail's betrayal of his friends. Wormtail knew the consequences of his actions, and a large share of the Potters' blood is on his hands. Snape did not know what would happen or when or to whom. He only saw a threat to his master that he dutifully reported. When he realized what LV intended to do, he repented, went to Dumbledore, and spied for him at "great personal risk." Pettigrew, in contrast, actively betrayed his friends, then killed twelve Muggles, framed another Marauder who spent twelve years in Azkaban because of him, hid for those same twelve years as a rat. I won't even count resurrecting Voldemort, killing Cedric, and all the other crimes PP was involved in relating to the Harry kidnap plot. There is no comparison. Snape didn't know the consequences. He repented. PP did know the consequences; he went into hiding after committing yet more crimes. Carol, who thinks that the Sirius fans should be up in arms against Wormtail rather than Snape From juli17 at aol.com Fri Jan 27 07:07:36 2006 From: juli17 at aol.com (juli17ptf) Date: Fri, 27 Jan 2006 07:07:36 -0000 Subject: VA/H=Mx13+RP? (was: Was the eavesdropper unimportant to Harry?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147107 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "lupinlore" wrote: > > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "juli17ptf" > wrote: > > > > > As for Snape's methodical verbal/emotional abuse of Harry, again > > are you saying that his abuse of Harry is EQUAL to Peter's murder > > of Cedric, murder of 12 other innocent people and very willing > > resurrection of a psychopath? VA/H=Mx13+RP? (Where VA=verbal abuse, > > H=Harry, M=murder, RP=resurrected psychopath). > > > > Absolutely and totally yes. In that neither of them can be defended > and neither of them, given a universe that functions on at least > rough karmic laws (and yes, we aren't totally sure about the > Potterverse yet) can escape severe punishment for their > reprehensible and unforgivable actions. Oh, you forgot a factor, > which is the time scale of Snape's constant and methodical abuse. > Let's see, given that each of Wormtail's actions take about ten > seconds, and Snape abuses Harry for at least three periods a week, > and adding detentions, that would give Snape's actions a weight of - - > - hmmm, carry the one --- 748,800. So the real equation would be: > (VA/H)(748,800) = or > 13M+RP. > > > Lupinlore > Julie: Fair enough, if that's your opinion. I guess my bottom line is that murder is a much greater crime than verbal abuse. Comparing Cedric and Harry, Cedric is dead. His life is over. He will never laugh or cry, have a thought or a feeling, see a sunset or hug a friend (etc, etc) again. Harry meanwhile suffers some anger, humiliation, and very little long-term effect from Snape's nastiness, other than perhaps a disinterest in Potions and an unpleasant memory of a hated teacher which he isn't likely to revisit often. Meanwhile, all things being equal, Harry would go on to live a largely satisfying life, with joys and tears, and love and heartbreak. Something Cedric will never have. Really, can anyone say Harry's limited suffering from Snape's nastiness even remotely compares with Cedric suffering a lifetime taken away from him? Snape's actions may take place over years, and Wormtail's may have been a single act, but that act is like comparing dozens of stinkbombs to a nuclear explosion. And that's not to say that Snape isn't bad when he's treating Harry so cruelly. But the murderer Wormtail is BADDER, with capital letters. Betcha Cedric's parents think so too. (And that might sound flippant, but living through the murder of your child is so beyond dealing with a mean, abusive teacher that it's almost a joke to equate the two in any way.) Anyway, that's how I base my judgment. And while Snape may be karmically punished for his meanness to Harry, it will be a much lesser punishment than Wormtail would receive for his string of deliberate murders (and direct accessory to murders). Julie From Aisbelmon at hotmail.com Fri Jan 27 07:55:06 2006 From: Aisbelmon at hotmail.com (M.Clifford) Date: Fri, 27 Jan 2006 07:55:06 -0000 Subject: VA/H=Mx13+RP? Snape's Culpability? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147108 > > > Alla: > > > > > > ... HOW else except Voldemort killing Prophecy couple and > > > their baby could have Snape thought that information will > > > be used. > > > > > > Honestly, Snape is an intelligent man. Are you arguing that he > > > truly had no idea what Voldemort will do ... > > > > > > Claudia: > > I very firmly believe in DDMSnape and therefore I much more often > > agree to what Steve writes than to Alla's points of view but in > > this cast I can't help but agree to Alla. > > > > How on earth could an intelligent person with only a little > > knowledge of the "Dark Lord" think that he would react any > > differently than he did? > > > > ...edited... > > bboyminn: > Snape was a Death Eater, he acted like a DE, he did a bad > thing, and he certainly can't be blameless for that. Valky: I find myself agreeing with Steve here, and with this additional point. Snape the DE was spying on Dumbledore, a fearfully powerful wizard and Voldemort's most dangerous enemy. Snape is Voldemort's servant, and he has loyalties to Voldemort and, naturally along with that, concern for his wellbeing. >From the first three lines of the prophecy, which is according to DD's word, probably, the most Snape managed to hear.. The one with the power to vanquish the Dark Lord approaches, born to those who have thrice defied him.. born as the seventh month dies, The whole thing is entirely ambiguous as to the age of this person right up until the last word of the three lines. IOW you can't know from the first two lines, or even from the greater portion of the third line that this person is a child yet to be born or that his parents are living people. If the prophecy clearly and unambiguously outlined that Harry was yet to be born throughout the three lines, then, yes, it would be ridiculous for Snape to miss it. But as it fits, Snape needed only to miss or overlook the last *word* of the third line, and he could never assume from what he knew that Voldemort would target a young couple and their baby, there was just no reason to under the current circumstances. >From here we can postulate the skewing of Snape's perspective. In Dumbledore's hands the prophecy could only be several times more a threat to Voldemort. From Snapes POV, Dumbledore had acquired a new weapon, and Voldemort was in imminent danger, not a mother and her innocent child, not someone who onced saved his life, but Voldemort, his Master. Snape's priority as a DE was to serve Voldemort and what more important a way to serve your boss than to warn him that his most feared enemy has a new powerful weapon against him, I can certainly understand, and justify as in character, a momentary distraction on Snape's behalf when running to Voldie with this vital news. bboymmin: > But Wormtail knew SPECIFICALLY what would happen when he /betrayed/ > the Potters. There > was no vague imprecise non-specific nastiness in his action. He knew > full well that he was signing a death warant for Harry and his > parents. > I say /that/ direct knowledge of specific consequences does make a > difference. Valky: Hear Hear, Steve. Peter is vile. Snape is horrible and really really unlikeable, but Peter is worse, much worse, lower than worm carcass, JIMHO. :) From R.Vink2 at chello.nl Fri Jan 27 10:26:13 2006 From: R.Vink2 at chello.nl (Renee) Date: Fri, 27 Jan 2006 10:26:13 -0000 Subject: How to contstruct an ESE!plot was Re: The Secret Revealed! ESE!Arthur In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147109 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "pippin_999" wrote: > > > > Alla: > > > This is the stranger, whose very first act > > when he starts actually acting is to fight darkness of the Dementors > > with light of the Patronus. Not the symbolism I would picture evil > > character to be introduced with. > > Pippin: > His first act was to stand there arguing with it, which Dumbledore tells > us never works. He doesn't get rid of it until after Harry passes out. Not > very nice. And what was it doing there anyway? Who ordered it to > invade the train? > Renee: Not quite true in both cases, but Alla is closer to the truth. Lupin's first act is to create flames in his palm, spreading light in the darkness. And Harry has already passed out when Lupin speaks to the Dementor. (My guess would be that it took him some time to summon up a good memory. It's not as if his life has been all sunshine.) Renee From quigonginger at yahoo.com Fri Jan 27 10:35:33 2006 From: quigonginger at yahoo.com (quigonginger) Date: Fri, 27 Jan 2006 10:35:33 -0000 Subject: VA/H=Mx13+RP? Snape's Culpability? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147110 > > > > Alla: > > > > > > > > ... HOW else except Voldemort killing Prophecy couple and > > > > their baby could have Snape thought that information will > > > > be used. (etc.) Ginger: As you can tell by the arrows, Alla has had a lot of responses to this. I'm just throwing up a possibility. Not saying it is canon, but a possibility. Snape was spying on DD. Why? Most likely under LV's orders. Not many people go about listening at keyholes for giggles. And LV would have wanted to know what DD was doing if he left Hogwarts. LV may even have had an idea that that night's meeting would have been important. Why else would he have a servant listening at the keyhole of a lady's quarters? Not to pick up tips for his social life. So I think we can assume that 1)LV sent Snape to spy on DD; 2)LV expected something to be said that would interest him; and 3)LV expected a full report from Snape. We know LV believed the prophecy, but did Snape? Snape doesn't seem to be the type who goes in for all the Trelawny hype. If Snape it one thing, it's logical. (See the Book One Obstacle Course.) Prophecy, Schmophecy. LV wants info! And it's Snape's job to get it. So what does Snape hear that night? Nothing. Nothing but a mad charlaton going off her rocker trying to impress DD with her vague babblings. Nothing that would interest a nice analytical Evil Overlord like oh, say, Palpatine. But no, LV is a snake of a different feather. Those Evil Overlords have to have a downfall, else they'd not fall at the end. And LV's is that he believed a stupid prophecy. So Snape goes to give his report on ...nothing. "Yes, my Lord. There was a woman in the room and she and DD talked about a potential job opening. And then? Well, my Lord, then he wasn't going to hire her. Then? Well, my Lord, it was truely pathetic. She pretended to have a vision. Obviously she had prepared it well in advance. It was about you, my Lord, (surely she planned that for maximum shock value. After all, your name does cause great fear) and it was some nonsense that a baby would be born who would overthrow you, not that anyone could do that to you, May You Live Forever.. oops sorry, wrong overlord. Anyway, my Lord. She babbled on about someone born as the 7th month dies to parents who had betrayed you thrice, (note, my Lord, how she used those magical numbers to get the old fool's attention) well, that baby would vanquish you.. yes, I'm pretty sure vanquish was the word she used. You want it verbatim, my Lord? Very well, but I was thrown out part way through. Why? Well, that odd barman caught me and threw me out. Yes, my Lord, verbatim, as you wish..." Exit Snape, turn the page, and suddenly, LV is believing the prophecy. Is that how it happened? Probably not. But it is a possibility. Ginger, wondering if Lisa Turpin is ESE! From amiabledorsai at yahoo.com Fri Jan 27 10:59:24 2006 From: amiabledorsai at yahoo.com (amiabledorsai) Date: Fri, 27 Jan 2006 10:59:24 -0000 Subject: Snape's Confundus line in PoA (Was: Was the eavesdropper unimportant to Harr In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147111 > Amiable Dorsai wrote: > > > Harry knows that Snape told Fudge that he, Ron and Hermione > > were Confunded. > > Harry knows that Fudge subsequently ignored their stories. > > What do you suppose Harry thinks? > Carol responds: > Quite possibly he doesn't think about it at all. > We certainly have no evidence that he does. Amiable Dorsai: Other than the fact that he goes into capslock mode when Snape repeats the suggestion. Granted, he had one or two other reasons. Carol: > Or quite possibly, he realizes that, as Hermione points out > earlier ("We attacked a teacher! We're going to be in so much > trouble!"), Snape has actually prevented their expulsion by > telling Fudge that they were Confunded. (Hogwarts students > don't cast spells that knock out teachers with impunity. Only > Snape's statement that they didn't know what they were doing > prevents further inquiry.) Amiable Dorsai: If such is his intention, he need merely say nothing about the attack at all. No, his purpose is clear: he wants to discredit the Trio's story before they can tell it. He succeeds admirably. Trust me, Harry noticed. Hell, I'll bet even Ron noticed. Amiable Dorsai From ceridwennight at hotmail.com Fri Jan 27 10:57:27 2006 From: ceridwennight at hotmail.com (Ceridwen) Date: Fri, 27 Jan 2006 10:57:27 -0000 Subject: How to contstruct an ESE!plot was Re: The Secret Revealed! ESE!Arthur In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147112 houyhnhnm: > > And what was he doing on the train in the first place? It's a > strange > > way for a fully qualified wizard to travel. Maybe he was too poor to > > own a broom, but why not apparate or travel by floo? > > Jen: > Dumbledore. Asked him to ride knowing he could deal with a > dementor if there was any trouble. That's not actually canon but it > seems like it could be. :) Ceridwen: I think it *might* be customary for a new teacher to ride the train. Lupin does it in PoA, and Slughorn does it in HBP. Harry doesn't notice Quirrel on the train so he may have gone straight to the castle (wasn't he a teacher there before his year off?), Lockhart probably wouldn't have been caught dead on it (too common, no grand entrance), and Umbridge would have seen herself as too much above riding with the students. But, Lupin is not the only new instructor we see on the train. Ceridwen. From ceridwennight at hotmail.com Fri Jan 27 11:05:06 2006 From: ceridwennight at hotmail.com (Ceridwen) Date: Fri, 27 Jan 2006 11:05:06 -0000 Subject: =?iso-8859-1?q?Re:_Lord_Voldemort's_Six_Horcruxes=3F_Are_Dumbledore=92s_Opinions_Wrong=3F_(LVs_SHADOW?= In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147113 Brothergib wrote: > > Interesting, but Voldemort is not snakelike when he reemerges from > > his long 'exile' when he conversed with 'the very worst of our kind'. > > I think we can safely assume that when Voldemort met with DD at > > Hogwarts, he had four Horcruxes, so was already fairly safe from > > death. Why would he then start using snake venom to protect his > > physical body? Protect it from what? It was clearly ineffective > > against the Avada Kedavra! > Carol: *(snip)* > I think he must have been snakelike (as the result of Nagini as > Horcrux) before Godric's Hollow for two reasons. First, the DEs in the > graveyard scene don't react at all to his appearance. This is > Voldemort restored, Voldemort as they knew him. And second, the face > that appears out of Quirrell's head in SS/PS is snakelike. At that > point, Quirrell is drinking unicorn blood to sustain his master, but > snake venom only comes into the picture when its used to create his > fetal body and provide "milk" for baby!mort. Ceridwen: I think that, as LV split his soul and removed the pieces, he became a bit less human each time. He was born with one quality of snakes: Parseltongue. So as he becomes less human, he becomes more snakelike. I think that, if he became an Animagus, he would become a snake; and his Patronus is probably a snake (or a basilisk or other serpentine creature), IMO. Snakelike properties might even be a Slytherin family trait. Look at Scrimgeour. He is very leonine. I think that, if he decided to start making multiple horcruxes, he would turn even more lion- like. Some people just tend toward looking like certain animals. And yes, I do think the ESE!Guys have Patronuses (Patroni?). These are for defense, and even bad guys need to defend themselves. Ceridwen. From exodusts at yahoo.com Fri Jan 27 05:57:21 2006 From: exodusts at yahoo.com (exodusts) Date: Fri, 27 Jan 2006 05:57:21 -0000 Subject: Does anyone have any ideas as to how Snape was spying for the OOTP? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147114 Wrigs21 wrote: > I have heard "speculation" that perhaps Snape is an animagus......a > bat-like creature to be exact. I suppose this would be an easy way > for him to disguise his presence.... > How about this: Snape is a spider animagus. He was in the broom shed at the Burrow on Dumbledore's hat. He now knows that Ron and Hermione are privy to the secret of the Prophecy. He will attempt Occlumency on Ron at some point in the final book. Ron will overcome his fear of spiders, to resist this and/or defeat Snape. There are plenty of spider-suggestive bits and pieces from the books you can use to support this argument. Sorry if it has been brought up before. [S]nape's [P]rophecy [I]nsight [D]efeated, [E]nnobling [R]on? exodusts From brahadambal at indiatimes.com Fri Jan 27 04:42:07 2006 From: brahadambal at indiatimes.com (latha279) Date: Fri, 27 Jan 2006 04:42:07 -0000 Subject: Does anyone have any ideas as to how Snape was spying for the OOTP? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147115 wrigs21 wrote: > > I have heard "speculation" that perhaps Snape is an animagus......a > bat-like creature to be exact. I suppose this would be an easy way > for him to disguise his presence.... brady: I am assuming that "spying FOR the OotP" implies that he is bringing in news for the Order without being found out. But as far as canon goes, Snape does not require to be undercover. LV knows that he is acting as a spy for the Order and encourages the rumour. LV thinks that Snape is giving him news about the Order and allows for news from LV's side (albiet altered) to reach the Order through Snape. Although I am a DDM!Snape person, I really found it very disturbing that two people (apparently people whom DD respected a lot) - Bones and Vance - were killed following Snape's information passing to LV! But we do not hear of what real use Snape has been to the Order. How come he did not inform the Order about the bridge incident? Why didn't he inform about the giant movement in the north(?) that the muggles believed to be hurricane activity? And come to think of it - with mordern day technology which the WW is not SO aware of - why wasn't this giant movement captured in the satellite images? Does the WW interfere in that too? just wondering, Brady. From finwitch at yahoo.com Fri Jan 27 13:36:09 2006 From: finwitch at yahoo.com (finwitch) Date: Fri, 27 Jan 2006 13:36:09 -0000 Subject: Was the eavesdropper unimportant to Harry? WAS: Re: Snape again In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147116 amiabledorsai: ... he[Snape] poisons Fudge's mind against the testimony of The > Trio by convincing him that their belief in Sirius's innocence is the > result of their being confunded. > > As a result, Sirius remained a fugitive subject to the Kiss upon > apprehension, and no Ministry effort was made to find Pettigrew. > > Assuming that Snape really is DDM, this is one of the most damaging > "own goals" of the entire series. Aside from leaving Peter free to > eventually resurrect Voldemort, Snape planted the seed of doubt that > Rita Skeeter so lavishly fertilised, and that bloomed into Fudge's > conclusion that Harry was a dangerous braggart. > > None of this has escaped Harry's attention, I'm sure. Finwitch: Quite right. Mainly, Snape is *constantly* accusing, (mis)judging and penalising Harry - whether or not Harry was guilty, without bothering to investigate, listen etc. In other words, behaving just like Vernon Dursley where it matters. All the time, in the place where Harry's always felt most like home since the death of his parents: Hogwarts. So Snape presents Dursley- treatment in WizardWorld. Voldemort, OTOH, as evil as he is, feared by most is a different matter 1) Most of Harry's life, he's *distant*. (Unlike Snape/Dursleys who have been present all the time...) 2) Harry can/will/should actively fight Voldemort, and gets only praise for it. Very different from "professor Snape, Harry". Or Dursleys, in whose house Harry must live... And I don't wonder why Neville's so terrified of Snape. You know, it's entirely different matter than imprisoned Bellatrix - there are no school/courtecy rules involved in fighting Bellatrix/Voldemort, which in Snape's case deprive these children from many defence strategies. Finwitch From brahadambal at indiatimes.com Fri Jan 27 04:23:34 2006 From: brahadambal at indiatimes.com (latha279) Date: Fri, 27 Jan 2006 04:23:34 -0000 Subject: VA/H=Mx13+RP? Snape's Culpability? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147117 Steve: >>> So, I see the events surrounding Snape as very plausable. He couldn't possibly know at the time how the Prophecy information would be interpreted and used, and that makes him very different from Wormtail.<<< Alla: >>> ... HOW else except Voldemort killing Prophecy couple and their baby could have Snape thought that information will be used. Honestly, Snape is an intelligent man. Are you arguing that he truly had no idea what Voldemort will do ...<<< Claudia: >>>I very firmly believe in DDMSnape and therefore I much more often agree to what Steve writes than to Alla's points of view but in this cast I can't help but agree to Alla. How on earth could an intelligent person with only a little knowledge of the "Dark Lord" think that he would react any differently than he did?<<< bboyminn: >>> Snape bears some responsibility in the Potter's deaths, he is afteral in a /nasty/ business, but I don't think he should be held responsible for the choices made by Voldemort. On the other hand, Wormtail clearly and unquestionably conspired with Voldemort with the known and sure intented of killing the Potters. Here there is no ambiguity. Wormtail's action are just as direct as Voldemort's in leading to the imminent and immediate death of the Potter's; he acted with that specific intent. Not saying any of this cast of characters is blameless, just trying to keep their degree and nature of blame in prespective.<<< brady: I agree with Steve here. Snape is less guilty of the Potters murder than Peter. I am not saying he is not guilty at all. He knew that something nasty would happen after this. But if he didn't want the Potters to die (in particular), then there was no way he could have stopped it AFTER having given the information. However intelligent Snape is (or might have been), AND assuming that he also KNEW that Lily was pregnant at the time the prophecy was made, there is NO WAY what-so-ever to have known at the time of passing on the information to LV, that the Potters' child would definitely be born as July fades!! Assuming that the WW witnesses a lot more normal deliveries than ceasarians, there is still no way Snape could have known that the Potters' AND the Longbottoms' child WOULD be definitely be born as July fades. and as pregnancy rules go, even the attendant gynac cannot say exactly when the baby will come. they always say + or - a week to 10 days! So, Harry might have been born in the middle of July or as August began, instead of as July faded! Also, what proof do we have that LV chose ONLY HP for murder? He might have gone on a killing spree to try and finish off ALL children who were born that year in the last week of July, no? Also, we do KNOW that he got only half the prophesy and the complete version. (Now, come to think of it, WAS THAT DELIBERATE ON PART OF SNAPE? Did he by any chance withhold information about "mark him as equal"?) At least, logically speaking, ANYBODY who is afraid of death AND has heard of such a prophecy would do that. Why else did it take him 1 year to reach the Potters? He could have landed at their doorstep on 1st August to finish off their child. And they did not even have a secret keeper at that time. In Hindu mythology, we hear of the story of Lord Krisna's birth. On the day of His parents' wedding a prophecy is made that their eight born will be his maternal uncle's murderer. The maternal uncle, Kamsa, was a terrible demon who had imprisoned his own father too. And somebody told this uncle that if 8 children are born and are alive, any of them could turn out to be his nemesis depending upon whom you start counting as first!! And the fool murdered each child the moment it was born! My point here is that -- what stopped LV from doing something similar? SNAPE DID NOT TELL LV THAT IT IS THE POTTERS! He merely said "Dark Lord! I have news for you. I have heard a Prophecy being made about you. Your Highness is in danger as your nemesis is going to be born soon. I heard '......'". He DID NOT say :"Dark Lord! Kill the Potters child as this child is your nemesis!". (quotes are mine, not JKR's) Peter, on the other hand, said :"Dark Lord! My greatest moment as a DE has come. I offer you the Potters!"(quote is mine, not JKR's). Assuming that by this time, LV has info that their child was born at the end of July. He also knew that the Longbottoms too have a child. (Assuming that he does his research as meticulously as Hermione which I myself doubt very much. LV is impulsive to say the least.) Therefore, I hold Peter as more responsible of the Potters death than Snape. If it is true that Snape regrets their death, it only proves that he is more human than Peter! JMO, Brady. From agdisney at msn.com Fri Jan 27 13:56:12 2006 From: agdisney at msn.com (Andrea Grevera) Date: Fri, 27 Jan 2006 08:56:12 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Merope's Selfishness References: <7839979.1138302531303.JavaMail.administrator@webmail> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147118 SSSusan: "But to call what she did at the orphanage "an act of utter selfishness"? I can't go that far. She had been left by Tom, she was flat broke, she had no family she could turn to for help, and no assets left. Did you not feel despair in what she did? desperation? depression? " BAW: She could at least have left him at a WIZARDLING orphanage; I'm sure they exist. (We don't know that they do, but we don't know that they don't, and every society must make SOME provision for babies and children whose parents can't or won't properly care for them.) BAW Andie: But how was she to know if Baby Tom would be a wizard? If he was non magic and grew up in a wizard orphanage he would have been subject to the same child nastiness that he used on the muggle children where he grew up and he wouldn't have understood why he couldn't be like the other children. I'm not standing up for Tom, not at all, but there should have been some other way for Merope to get help. She knew of Diagon Alley, she was at Borgin & Burkes, I'm sure if she had asked for help in Diagon Alley someone would have been able to direct her somewhere even if it was St. Mungos. Yes she was depressed and didn't know where to turn but if she only asked she would not have been left alone, Tom wouldn't have grown up in a muggle orphanage, he wouldn't have turned rotten, he wouldn't have become LV and we wouldn't have a story. Andie Before posting to any list, you MUST read the group's Admin File! http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/files/Admin_Files/HBF_Text__MUST_READ Please use accurate subject headings and snip unnecessary material from posts to which you're replying! Yahoo! Groups Links [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From finwitch at yahoo.com Fri Jan 27 14:10:48 2006 From: finwitch at yahoo.com (finwitch) Date: Fri, 27 Jan 2006 14:10:48 -0000 Subject: Merope's Selfishness In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147119 Andie: > Yes she was depressed and didn't know where to turn but if she only asked > she would not have been left alone, Tom wouldn't have grown up in a muggle > orphanage, he wouldn't have turned rotten, he wouldn't have become LV and > we wouldn't have a story. Finwitch: Andie dear - one of the symptoms of depression is inability to do anything constructive like seek help so we can't blame poor Merope on that, now can we? We've seen what those horrible Dementors do. Don't forget that depression was what spawned the idea of them... it's what they bring about. Can you expect a victim of a Dementor do something like that? Even if they hadn't been Kissed by one? Because that's what depression is like. Finwitch From agdisney at msn.com Fri Jan 27 14:20:22 2006 From: agdisney at msn.com (Andrea Grevera) Date: Fri, 27 Jan 2006 09:20:22 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] How to contstruct an ESE!plot was Re: The Secret Revealed! ESE!Arthur References: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147120 Pippin: > His first act was to stand there arguing with it, > which Dumbledore tells us never works. He doesn't > get rid of it until after Harry passes out. Not very > nice. And what was it doing there anyway? Who ordered > it to invade the train? houyhnhnm: And what was he doing on the train in the first place? It's a strange way for a fully qualified wizard to travel. Maybe he was too poor to own a broom, but why not apparate or travel by floo? Andie: Maybe DD wanted Lupin on the train in case of something happening. He probably didn't think that dementors would board the train but he must have felt that having the DADA teacher on board Harry would have extra protection. DD might have felt that since the dementors were sent to Harry's home town, what was going to stop whoever (Umbridge) from sending them to the Hogwart's Express. DD knew what the dementors could do to Harry and he knew that Harry couldn't fight them yet. With Lupin there and his knowledge of DADA he probably felt that Harry would be relatively safe. Just my thoughts. Andie [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From amiabledorsai at yahoo.com Fri Jan 27 15:02:44 2006 From: amiabledorsai at yahoo.com (amiabledorsai) Date: Fri, 27 Jan 2006 15:02:44 -0000 Subject: How to contstruct an ESE!plot was Re: The Secret Revealed! ESE!Arthur In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147121 > houyhnhnm: > And what was he doing on the train in the first place? It's a > strange way for a fully qualified wizard to travel. Maybe he > was too poor to own a broom, but why not apparate or travel > by floo? > > > Ceridwen: > I think it *might* be customary for a new teacher to ride the train. > Lupin does it in PoA, and Slughorn does it in HBP. Harry doesn't > notice Quirrel on the train so he may have gone straight to the > castle (wasn't he a teacher there before his year off?), Lockhart > probably wouldn't have been caught dead on it (too common, no grand > entrance), and Umbridge would have seen herself as too much above > riding with the students. But, Lupin is not the only new instructor > we see on the train. Amiable Dorsai: Good thought. Another possibility is that he was simply nostalgic. A trip on the Hogwarts Express would be a way to recapture the feeling of the last truly happy time of his life. Did anyone else have the feeling that Lupin really wasn't asleep for the whole trip? I thought it odd, while reading the scene, that he wasn't awakened by the kerfuffle with Draco. After I finished the book, I thought that perhaps he was feigning sleep in order to listen in on Harry, to get some insight into James's and Lily's son. (Fodder for you, Pippin, if you wish to ascribe harsher motives!) Amiable Dorsai From vuurdame at xs4all.nl Fri Jan 27 15:07:44 2006 From: vuurdame at xs4all.nl (festuco) Date: Fri, 27 Jan 2006 15:07:44 -0000 Subject: Draco and Harry In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147122 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "horridporrid03" wrote: > Betsy Hp: > It's the difference between a character purposefully being an > antagonist and a character tripping into the role through > misunderstanding and misspeaking. The first is pretty straight up > and down, but the second leaves all sorts of interesting wiggle > room. It's the space JKR left herself by going with the second > option that I find so significant. So because Draco accidently insulted Harry's mum he should be excused? The only accident here is Draco not verifying thouroughly enough that Harry was the right kind. Poor Draco, messed up his chance to be friends with Harry Potter because he accidently let slip how much he despises people like Harry's mum. Gerry From kchuplis at alltel.net Fri Jan 27 15:18:12 2006 From: kchuplis at alltel.net (Karen) Date: Fri, 27 Jan 2006 09:18:12 -0600 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: VA/H=Mx13+RP? (was: Was the eavesdropper unimportant to Harry?) References: Message-ID: <001f01c62354$e32e86a0$b301010a@ConsolidatedTelephone.local> No: HPFGUIDX 147123 carol: Snape's crime in reporting the Prophecy is nowhere near as significant as Wormtail's betrayal of his friends. Wormtail knew the consequences of his actions, and a large share of the Potters' blood is on his hands. kchuplis: And maybe it is wrong of me, but I somehow find it a lot more heinous when someone who always pretended to be a friend would be so traitorous where as, Snape, though he hated James in school, is in a much more removed position. Not that it is a Good Thing, but it certainly isn't in the same league as Wormtail; someone who probably spent a lot of time with the Potters, for years, came over for dinner and listened to quidditch games on the WWN etc. That is just really sad. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From nrenka at yahoo.com Fri Jan 27 16:03:48 2006 From: nrenka at yahoo.com (nrenka) Date: Fri, 27 Jan 2006 16:03:48 -0000 Subject: Snape's Confundus line in PoA In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147124 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "amiabledorsai" wrote: > Carol: > > Or quite possibly, he realizes that, as Hermione points out > > earlier ("We attacked a teacher! We're going to be in so much > > trouble!"), Snape has actually prevented their expulsion by > > telling Fudge that they were Confunded. (Hogwarts students > > don't cast spells that knock out teachers with impunity. Only > > Snape's statement that they didn't know what they were doing > > prevents further inquiry.) > > Amiable Dorsai: > If such is his intention, he need merely say nothing about the > attack at all. No, his purpose is clear: he wants to discredit the > Trio's story before they can tell it. He succeeds admirably. Not to mention that Snape goes into full CAPSLOCK mode by the end of the book, enough to draw surprised commentary from Fudge: "Fellow seems quite unbalanced," said Fudge, staring after him. "I'd watch out for him if I were you, Dumbledore." (PoA, American HB, p. 420) I admit, I'm probably not creative enough to come up with a good explaination of how Snape was being helpful in that situation. It's never made textually explicit, but I don't wonder if that public meltdown permanently colored Snape in Fudge's perceptions, also tipping him over into the 'nutter' category along with Harry Potter. -Nora also thinks the whole scene is somewhat pointless if not sincere rage, but that's been hashed over to death already From rlai1977 at yahoo.com Fri Jan 27 16:11:43 2006 From: rlai1977 at yahoo.com (rlai1977) Date: Fri, 27 Jan 2006 16:11:43 -0000 Subject: Draco and Harry (was:The GoF Train Scene - and beyond...) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147125 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "mjanetd" wrote: > > Betsy HP wrote: > >> Picking on inferiors: Dudley does love to take down the very tiny. > > (Fourteen beating on eleven is pretty pathetic, IMO.) Draco likes > > to take down his rivals, whom he automatically classifies > > as "inferior". > > > Reading your post made me realize that Draco is a female type bully. > High school girls usually use words to torment their victims instead of > fists. Draco is very good with an insult but never physically or > magically attacks anyone unless he has his 2 bodyguards to do the > dangerous work or his victims back is turned. > > janetd Now RP: I see this 'Draco is a female type of bully' argument a lot, and I must confess never quite getting it :-) For my idea of a bully is not only mean-spirited, but is also constantly and meaningfully more powerful than/at an advantage to the victim in regards to whatever the tool said bully uses against the victim. If Dudley mostly go and pick folks larger than him to exchange punches with, and mostly end up the loser of the fight- would we still see him as a bully? Sure, he intends no good and his targets has done nothing to warrant such hostility, but surely the world is not divided into either good people or bullies? Back to Draco, yeah he says a lot of nasty things to people, and initiates most of the fights he got involved in too. But when has he verbally abused someone who is unable to either retaliate or ignore him? When has he ever verbally abused someone who is speech challenged, or not very good at the language Draco speaks? Also, Draco is often the less popular among the two parties voicing a less popular opinion, so he doesn't even function like a 'mean girl' sort in my mind. Crabbe and Goyle are often said to "do the dirty work" for him. While as far as I recall, they've not even ONCE stopped anyone from verbally or physically(!) attacking Draco, nor have they gone and attack someone on Draco's command. When Draco was slapped by Hermione, punched into a bloody pulp by Harry and George, verbally retaliated by various people countless times- what were these scary big fellows doing? Standing aside, doing nothing but looking (unconvincingly, judging by the outcome) threatening :-D So yeah, while Draco undoubtedly has the foulest mouth in Hogwarts, is mean and ill-spirited, I just can't call him a 'bully' with a straight face. Judging from the fact that Draco keeps pestering the three people who'd given him hell time and again, I really doubt he goes after those who he knows are weaker than him (that's how Dudley works), I think he goes after those he really dislikes. Not saying that makes him an angel, of course :-D RP From foxmoth at qnet.com Fri Jan 27 17:11:44 2006 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Fri, 27 Jan 2006 17:11:44 -0000 Subject: How to make Remus look evil , when he is not /Draco and Harry In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147126 > >> Pippin: > > Upset?! I daresay he was upset. And that's an excuse for murder, is it? Funny, you don't seem to be so lenient where Snape is > concerned. Wasn't his world being turned upside down too? > > Alla: > > No, Pippin, it is not an excuse for murder, but IMO it sure is an > excuse for attempt to avenge his dead friends and one alive, who > suffered unjustly for twelve years, because the traitor framed him. > IMO of course. > Pippin: So why was he trying to murder/execute Peter, if his desire for vengeance is no excuse? What's wrong with the dementors, or taking Peter to the castle? Sirius himself suggested that before. Alla: > And I am not sure what are you talking about "Snape's world being > turned upside down"? Are you talking about Tower events or Shrieking > Shack? Pippin: I am talking about the Shrieking Shack. Snape has just heard two men whom he thinks are murderers trying to feed Harry and co. some cock and bull ( or should I say stag and rat) story, about being animagi, and Sirius not working for Voldemort, in the midst of which Lupin admits that he has been taking advantage of Dumbledore's trust, just as he did when he was a boy. That in itself would be enough to make DDM!Snape furious. But it would be staggering for Snape to hear that Sirius was innocent, especially if he tried to warn James not to trust Sirius, and that was the reason another SK was picked, so he goes into violent denial about everything. Even so, he only threatens to call the dementors, and only after Sirius offers to go quietly to the castle (like he has a choice, with Snape's wand on him. ) Remember, Voldemort is trying to steal something from it. > Pippin; > > >And that reminds me, don't you think it's strange that > > Snape, who never misses a chance to gloat, didn't gloat over > > Dumbledore? If he was really filled with hatred and revulsion, > > wouldn't he have made a speech about it? Gloated a little? > > Basked in the glory? Can you imagine Snape missing a chance > > to do that? What could have come over him? ;-) > > Alla: > > No, Pippin, I don't find it strange at all, if what I believe is > true - namely that the underlying reason for Snape killing was > saving his own life ( I don't know what he is planning to do with > it - to serve bad or good guys), then Snape did not have TIME to > gloat. He wanted to leave Hogwarts and fast, before Order may > capture him or kill him. So, nope, I think it is very believable. > Pippin: No time for one teeny weeny gloat? Not even a "So long, sucker!" before he blew Dumbledore away? What was the rush? The Order was *losing* the battle on the stairs, that's why they sent for Snape in the first place. Of course, if you mean that Snape had to hurry away from the tower in order to call off the DE's before they did any more damage, I agree with you. :-) Alla: > As I said in the past - my RL metaphor for Draco's prejudice is anti- > Semitism ( and I know it is different for everybody), from my > experience people who spitted the what I see as equivalent > for "Mudblood" in the books did not just say it because they thought > that they are Okay with just saying things about Jews. They wanted > Jews to be shined from good education, good jobs, etc, etc and of > course they wanted Jews just leave the country . I don't see > Draco's attacks as blabbering of the little boy, I see it as his > ideological program, sort of where he stands on that issue and I > find it the most horrible verbal attacks in the books - NOT "Weasley > the king" or 'Potter stinks", but his "Mudblood" and they will be > killed ( Mudbloods, I mean) Pippin: Speaking as a Jew also (and not that I speak for other Jews), I see a difference between people who use those words and are deeply involved in the horrible things you mention, and people who use the words but have never met or spoken to a Jew in their lives, that they're aware of. Robeshop!Draco is in the second category, IMO. It seems he's had a very sheltered upbringing. He knows he's going to run into the Wrong Sort at Hogwarts, but I can't imagine his family have let him meet them before. There's no objective reality tied to what he's saying, no real person he's thinking of when he talks about the Wrong Sort. It doesn't make what he says any better or less hurtful, but he's not speaking as someone who's actually done these things. He can't be involved in shunning or anything else as yet, because he hasn't had the opportunity. Of course he does get the opportunity and he's raring to go. But it isn't quite the way he imagined it. He's been told that Muggleborns don't belong in the WW because they make inferior wizards, and yet Hermione beats him in every class. He tells himself this is the result of favoritism, but his father won't accept this excuse. He's angry about that, and turns the anger on Hermione instead of on his father where it belongs. He wishes she would die. But death is another thing he had no objective experience of (he can't see thestrals) and it turned out not to be as easy to kill as he'd imagined. So now he's been forced to realize that there *was* no objective reality behind one of his beliefs, and that may lead him, possibly, to question the others, instead of being blindly angry at Muggleborns because they exist. Pippin From foxmoth at qnet.com Fri Jan 27 18:04:32 2006 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Fri, 27 Jan 2006 18:04:32 -0000 Subject: ESE!Lupin condensed and Lupin and Sirius replies In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147127 > Pippin: > The identity of Wormtail *is* an "official" mystery, at least until > Lupin says, "Peter is Wormtail." At that point it seems solved -- > but what if it isn't? Neri: Who were Moony, Padfoot and Prongs were also official mysteries at the time, but they were officially closed together with Wormtail. Of course, this doesn't mean that Wormtail (or Moony, or Padfoot, or Prongs) can't turn out to be somebody else now. It is just that when a theory designed to be a big Bang at the climax of the whole series doesn't solve even *one* big official mystery, this is when I start wondering if it's even going in the right direction. Pippin: But you take it for granted that JKR isn't going to spring a big "unofficial" mystery on us again, and I don't. Because the first thing she'd have to do, if she wanted to fool us *again*, is convince us that there's nothing up her sleeve. It's been a straightforward fantasy adventure/bildungsroman from OOP on. Right. And I'm the Easter Bunny.:-) OOP has the "official" mystery of who hexed Podmore, with no "official" solution, just Hermione's guess that Lucius might have done it. Tied to this is the "official" mystery of what caused Harry's scar to hurt when Umbridge touched him and other surges of scar pain which seem to be connected with the Podmore matter except that none of the characters make the connection. That's odd, unless the solution isn't what Hermione thinks it is. > Pippin: > There are mysteries for which we are given provisional solutions > which in later books turn out to be incomplete...why Dumbledore left > Harry at the Dursleys, for example, or why Snape hates the Marauders. > There is usually some hint that they are partial, as there is in this case. Neri: Incomplete yes, but I can't remember an official solution that was later turned 180 degrees. Pippin: You mean besides Snape being responsible for the hexing, or Sirius being a traitor? We had no reason to doubt either of those when they were first put to us. Neri: Regarding Snape knowing the Marauders' nicknames, I'm personally sure he knows it from the pensieve. He didn't hear it the first time around, of course, but he probably visited this memory again, and I'm sure he wouldn't resist a chance to spy on the Marauders, even 20 years after the fact. If Harry could hear the Marauders' conversation in the pensieve, then so could Snape. In fact, I always thought that the pensieve scene was written, in a small part, to answer the question of where Snape had learned the Marauders' nicknames. Pippin: But Snape acts like he doesn't know for sure that the map is connected with the Marauders,and he *would* know if he'd had access to a pensieve at that time. He'd have known about running around with a werewolf every month too. > Pippin: > Wormtail's inconsistent ability *is* an "official" mystery: > "But Wormtail --displaying a presence of mind I would never have > expected of him--convinced Bertha Jorkins to accompany him on > a night-time stroll." --GoF ch 33. > Neri: Hmm, I'd say this is even more borderline than Hagrid's support of Snape in SS/PS. If there's a mystery here at all, it could very well be presented as "why had people underestimated Wormtail?" Or it could be taken as the official closing of a mystery: "Wormtail *was* underestimated". Especially since at that point we have good reason to believe Wormtail had deceived the whole WW to think he's dead for 12 years, successfully lies to Voldy and has the guts to cut his own hand. Pippin: The "official" mystery, put by Sirius, is "I'll never understand why I didn't see you were the spy from the start." He continues to call Wormtail a "weak, talentless thing" who supposedly turned to Voldemort for protection, while simultaneously thinking Peter was capable of killing or kidnapping Harry under Dumbledore's nose if he heard Voldemort was getting strong again. Voldemort goes right on calling Wormtail a poor wizard, despite all the wonderful things Pettigrew's supposedly done for him, and we see Peter being weak again in HPB. So I'd say the question of how Wormtail could have done all that stuff is more open than ever. Snape certainly shows a dangerous contempt for a wizard who's supposed to have killed twelve people with a wand held behind his back, even if they were Muggles, a wizard he must know has successfully lied to Voldemort, if your theory is correct. Or doesn't Snape know about the life debt either? Neri: I'd say the question "Who killed the unicorns in SS/PS?" is an officially solved mystery. Quirrellmort killed them. Pippin: How can it be officially solved when Quirrell never confessed to killing them? I'm not sure we agree on what an "official" solution is. I'd say it's one where the culprit confesses and is removed from any possibility of recanting. The confessions of Lockhart, Quirrell and Barty Jr are final, IMO. Voldemort, Pettigrew, Lupin, Umbridge and Snape no doubt have more to tell us, some of which is likely to contradict what we've already heard, as none of them are particularly noted for their honesty. Neri: I don't think Voldemort is so blind that he can't *recognize* love and gratitude, even if he doesn't feel them himself. Here are some of Dumbledore's words about Voldemort: But assuming for a moment you are right, are you saying ESE!Lupin didn't tell Voldemort about Wormtail's Debt, and didn't explain him the significance of it? Pippin: I'm saying Voldemort knows about Wormtail's debt, but discounts its significance as the kind of "ancient magic of which he knows, which he despises, and which he has always, therefore, underestimated -- to his cost" OOP ch 37. Voldemort knows that brave wizards who defy him, like Harry or Dumbledore, will put themselves in danger in order to rescue someone they care about. He can't imagine a weak, cowardly wizard doing that. As long as Wormtail remains genuinely frightened of him, Voldemort will think he's safe, debt or no debt. That Wormtail could unexpectedly act with the courage to which, as a Gryffindor, he must have once aspired, is not a thought that troubles Voldemort deeply, though he does need to reassure himself that Peter remains afraid. That the debt itself could give Pettigrew the strength to act does not enter LV's darkest dream. IMHO, of course. > Pippin: > Whether Dumbledore was reckless in trusting Snape is also an > "official" mystery. At least automatically assuming Lupin was > worthy of trust is a far more understandable mistake. > Neri: I agree this is an official mystery since Snape, McGonagall and Harry raise the question, but I'm not sure I understand your point here. Are you saying that Dumbledore recklessly trusting ESE!Lupin explains him recklessly trusting Snape, or what? Pippin: I'm saying I accept Dumbledore's reckless trust as his weakness. But I'm not sure that it was Snape he recklessly trusted, and trusting Lupin recklessly is a much more understandable mistake. Lupin is so personable and seemingly so anxious to please that suspecting him would feel like kicking a puppy, and the rap against werewolves as untrustworthy would make it seem horribly insensitive to boot. But Lupin has, by his own admission, twice taken advantage of Dumbledore's trust. > Pippin: > That's a stretch, IMO. Why not have Lupin suggest taking the other children back to the castle? Surely Ron and Hermione don't need to see Pettigrew die? Neri: It would mess with the next parts of the plot, and it would show disloyalty to Sirius, letting him shouldering the blame alone. Pippin: Friends don't let friends murder alone? I'm afraid I don't share your respect for a man who wants to execute a traitor in front of three young teens. Seeing death is a life-changing experience for a wizard. I ask again what need was there to involve Ron and Hermione in an execution? Oh, the plot fairy made him do it! Personally, I prefer a character who doesn't give a damn to an author who doesn't, but I guess that's a matter of taste.:) Neri: I think Lupin's forgetfulness is easily explained by the DADA jinx. Pippin: I don't think so. It seems to work like the opposite of felix felicis, causing people to make foolish decisions confidently. It was foolish of Quirrellmort to touch Harry, foolish of Lockhart to try to obliviate someone with a broken wand, foolish of Fake!Moody to try to kill Harry under Dumbledore's nose, and foolish of Umbridge to insult the centaurs. Needless to say it was foolish of Snape to rush to the tower. So I would expect a foolish decision from Lupin, such as deciding to leave a trail for Snape out to the Shack, not some kind of selective amnesia. > Pippin: > It's a strange thing. My theory is unashamedly plot-driven, yet > it allows the characters to behave in character-driven ways, while your > theory, which is supposedly character-driven, appears to require > clumsy plotting to support it. > Neri: Not by my count. By my count, Goodguy!Lupin acts OOC hardly once during the whole night when Hermione does also. Pippin: Except that you have to blame all that forgetting on the DADA curse. Except when he speaks with "a steely note in his voice Harry had never heard before." Except when he has the presence of mind to remember to pick up Harry's I-cloak, when he's supposedly so scattered he can't even remember he's a werewolf. And it's not OOC for Hermione, because when the arena shifts from words to action, she's still at this point got a tendency to freeze rather than fight. I admit I haven't been consistent about Lupin's motives. I'm not trying to argue the case like a lawyer, picking the most convincing story and discarding everything that doesn't fit. It's more like I'm trying to solve a jigsaw puzzle with the picture on the cover hidden and some of the pieces still in the box. I'm trying to guess what the hidden parts of the puzzle show. JKR usually doesn't tell us too much about the subvillains' motives until they have their big Idunnit and here's why scene. Quirrell was power mad? Riddle was Voldemort? Who knew? What I can tell for sure at this point is that wavering *is* Lupin's character. That's canon. He wavered about whether to continue the animagi outings, and he wavered as an adult over whether to tell Dumbledore about Sirius, and then about whether to pursue his interest in Tonks. So I don't think it would be out of character for him to waver a bit in the Shrieking Shack. I grinned when the website told us when his birthday was. He's a Pisces, the sign of two fish swimming in opposite directions. Pisces supposedly find it difficult to make up their minds. We also know that Lupin wants everyone to like him, everyone he respects, at least. He doesn't seem to care if Slytherins or Ministry officials like him or not. But it's hard, isn't it, not to respect people who're fighting for your freedom, even if they're doing terrible things? He's got to be tempted by what Voldemort has to offer, no matter how hard it would be to make Voldemort keep his end of the bargain. "If they're offered freedoms we've been denying them for centuries, they're going to be tempted." Those are Lupin's words, explaining why the Goblins, even though they know what Voldemort is capable of, might listen to him and help him. Saying 'no' to temptation is not something Lupin's ever been good at. > Pippin: > It really doesn't matter what style or genre she's writing in. > Unless you can explain why it improves the story for JKR to > ignore the interior logic of the rules she herself has invented > in a crucial scene involving the principal characters, it's bad > writing for her to do so. > Neri: I'm not sure what you mean here by interior logic and rules. Pippin: JKR established that AK leaves no mark, and had Dumbledore repeat it in HBP, just to make sure we didn't forget it. She points out (deviously) that blood usually dries quickly, both in the episode with Harry's face, and by letting us know that dragon blood *doesn't* dry quickly. Horace magicks it off the walls and pronounces it still usable. After all that finicky detail, there's poor Dumbledore, supposedly lying dead for all that time, supposedly AK'd, with a trickle of blood on his face that Harry easily wipes away. If it's not important, it contradicts the logic of reminding us about the rules for AK and the logic of how blood is treated in the story, otherwise a matter of some significance. It might work in an absurdist or dreamlike fantasy, but the atmosphere of the books has become steadily more realistic. To say that it's now a bildungsroman so the mysteries don't matter anymore (I think that's Olivier's argument) is a bit of a puzzlement. Boys of sixteen or seventeen aren't expected to have much of a handle on life. But it's very common for them to think they do. Pippin From stevejjen at earthlink.net Fri Jan 27 18:09:05 2006 From: stevejjen at earthlink.net (Jen Reese) Date: Fri, 27 Jan 2006 18:09:05 -0000 Subject: VA/H=Mx13+RP? (was: Was the eavesdropper unimportant to Harry?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147128 Magpie: > I mean, from his pov think of it this way. He's on Voldemort's > side. His goal is to support him. (Sometimes, as weird as it > sounds,people do have trouble not thinking that villains > underneath it all really see everything the same way the heroes do > and so view their own actions the same way as the heroes do.) So > think of if Snape was working for DD and he heard a prophecy that > said that someone who would destroy him could be found in such and > such a place. He'd naturally pass that information on as a > supporter of DD. Jen: There's a small problem with the comparison because Snape is working toward an evil end. The actions are the same, the ends are not. Culpability-wise, I mean. > Carol responds: > If I understand correctly what you're saying, I agree with you. The > Prophecy incident occurred some months before Harry was born. Snape > was a twenty-year-old DE who happened to overhear a Prophecy > concerning apparent danger to his master. Jen: My initial reaction to Snape-the-eavesdropper was he would know exactly what it meant and was a scumbag for turning over a baby to Voldemort. He's a smart guy and should know how prophecies work and what kind of person Voldemort is. Here's my 'but', though. When you mention his age it makes me think twice about it. Not that he doesn't have blame in what eventually happened to the Potters (which no one seems to be arguing anyway), age would be a poor excuse. However, I'm wondering where he was in the stages of learning Occlumency and whether he would have been able to hide the information from Voldemort even if he tried? I keep thinking about his comment, "fools who wear their hearts proudly on their sleeves...weak people in other words--they stand no chance against his powers!" I still think that comment referred to Snape himself at one time, and his solution was to learn Occlumency as he told Harry. He believes Occlumency is the only protetion from LV. When did he decide he needed to learn protection from him and why? Was he one like Regulus and the Blacks who 'got cold feet when they saw what [Voldemort] was prepared to do to get power." ??(OOTP, chap. 6 p. 112, Scholastic) I'm thinking it's more likely the prophecy incident was the motivator for the Occlumency since DD told Harry that Snape "hastened to tell his master what he heard, for it concerned his master most deeply." (HBP, chap. 25, p. 549, Scholastic) Carol: > (He couldn't have been there on purpose to overhear a Prophecy. He > probably didn't even know there would be a job interview since it > was not the end of summer.) He follows Dumbledore, overhears part > of the interview and part of the Prophecy and is kicked out of the > bar. Jen: Why was he there? I keep wondering that. Maybe his job at that time was to tail Dumbledore because the plan was to eventually get a job and spy on him. The only other plausible option I can think if is he just happened to be in the Hog's Head that night, saw Dumbledore head upstairs and decided to follow. Carol: > Quite possibly Voldemort's reaction took him by surprise. Instead > of regarding the Prophecy as a vague future threat that might come > to pass when some kid born in July became old enough to threaten > him, Voldemort was worried about as yet unborn babies. Maybe young > Snape started worrying then, too, even watching the birth > announcements. Jen: It paints a picture of Snape as awfully naive not to wonder for a moment what Voldemort would do with the information. Naive or worse, unconcerned. I'm all for the possibility that the Snape Harry knows is not the Snape who joined the DE's, became bitter and battle- scarred, and possibly permanently altered himself practicing Occlumency so much. Still, naivete as a young man doesn't strike me as being in-character. Unconcern does, though. Karen: > And maybe it is wrong of me, but I somehow find it a lot more > heinous when someone who always pretended to be a friend would be > so traitorous where as, Snape, though he hated James in school, is > in a much more removed position. Not that it is a Good Thing, but > it certainly isn't in the same league as Wormtail; someone who > probably spent a lot of time with the Potters, for years, came over > for dinner and listened to quidditch games on the WWN etc. That is > just really sad. Jen: I totally agree. The fact that Snape hated James doesn't make it right but if he did indeed honestly try to amend for his actions it was a helluva lot more than Peter ever did, and was a much bigger leap since Snape hated the guy. Harry *does* hold Snape to a higher standard than Wormtail, as did his father and friends before him. That underestimation had a hand in all the heartache Peter is responsible for. People don't operate in vacuums. Jen From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Fri Jan 27 19:42:42 2006 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Fri, 27 Jan 2006 19:42:42 -0000 Subject: Snape as the perceived enemy (Was: Was the eavesdropper unimportant to Harry? ) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147129 Finwitch: > Voldemort, OTOH, as evil as he is, feared by most is a different matter 1) Most of Harry's life, he's *distant*. (Unlike Snape/Dursleys who have been present all the time...) > > And I don't wonder why Neville's so terrified of Snape. You know, it's entirely different matter than imprisoned Bellatrix - there are no school/courtecy rules involved in fighting Bellatrix/Voldemort, which in Snape's case deprive these children from many defence strategies. Carol responds: I agree that it's easier for Harry to focus his hatred on Snape than on Voldemort because Snape is near at hand, and for Neville to fear Snape (transferring his fears onto him from his grandmother, his previous "boggart," IMO) than to fear the DEs who attacked his parents when he was too young to understand what was happening. They were probably masked at the time and for most of his life they've been in prison. His fear of them during his early years is an abstraction, the stuff of nightmares, whereas Snape is real and frequently encountered, with the power to sneer and criticize and give detentions and deduct points. That does not make Snape the real enemy, only the perceived enemy--a sarcastic and unfair teacher whom they later learn has been a DE (and on whom Harry wants to plant the blame for Sirius Black's death), as opposed to the murderer of Harry's parents (Voldemort) and the torturers of Neville's (Bellatrix and company). And yet in OoP, after Neville has been reminded in several ways of what Bellatrix and her male companions did to his parents (Couch!Moody Crucioing the spider, the visit to his parents in the closed ward in OoP) and after the Lestranges have escaped from Azkaban, Neville suddenly shows marked improvement in spell-casting and determination to learn the defensive spells that Harry is teaching the DA. It's as if he suddenly understands who the real enemy is, not Snape but the DEs who Crucio'd his parents into insanity, an insight reinforced by his encounter with Bellatrix in the MoM. She Crucios him and mocks his family, gleefully pointing out that the Dark Lord has killed or destroyed many of them--as Snape has *never* done in any of the HP books. His treatment of Neville has stemmed solely from Neville's abysmal performance in Potions, which begins with melting Seamus's cauldron before Snape has spoken a word to Neville other than calling the roll. (Crouch!Moody's prolonged Crucio of the spider in front of Neville was incomparably more cruel than anything Snape has ever done to Neville, especially given that Crouch!Moody was himself one of the DEs who Crucio'd Neville's parents into insanity. Quite possibly Neville later learns who the Fake!Moody really was, making the suppressed trauma of his infancy more real to him--and much more devastating than Snape's sarcasm.) And if Snape were depriving the children of defensive strategies, how is it that his very first lesson in *Potions* mentions bezoars, a life-saving defense against the poisons Dark wizards frequently use against their enemies? And why would he emphasize the extremely important defensive strategy of nonverbal spells in DADA? Among the many reasons why Dumbledore finally gave the DADA position to Snape, one of them is surely that Snape is highly qualified to teach it. Note that there's not one shred of evidence that Snape is teaching the Dark Arts as opposed to Defense against them (Draco sneers at the uselessness of the class for budding DEs like himself). And even Harry only disagrees with Snape on the best way of dealing with a Dementor, ignoring the possibility that there may indeed be a better way for students less able than himself to cast a Patronus in the face of a creature sucking away their happiness. It's quite possible that Snape has been teaching Harry to fight *him* in preparation to fighting Voldemort. ("You are giving me weapons!" he says in the Occlumency lessons, presenting himself in the role of Voldemort, a tactic Harry doesn't seem to grasp.) Whether Snape is doing the same for Neville, I can't say, but as unfair teacher he is certainly not the real enemy to either boy (unless, of course, he's ESE!, in which case he should have killed Harry at the first opportunity, at least once he knew that Voldemort had returned). Carol, thinking that the difference between Snape's treatment of Neville and Bellatrix's treatment is at least as great as the difference between a Boggart and a Dementor From bboyminn at yahoo.com Fri Jan 27 19:44:22 2006 From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Fri, 27 Jan 2006 19:44:22 -0000 Subject: VA/H=Mx13+RP? Snape's Culpability? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147130 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "latha279" wrote: > > Steve: > > >>> So, I see the events surrounding Snape as very plausable. He couldn't possibly know at the time how the Prophecy > information would be interpreted and used, and that makes him very different from Wormtail.<<< > > Alla: > > >>> ... HOW else except Voldemort killing Prophecy couple and > their baby could have Snape thought that information will > be used. ...<<< > > > Claudia: > > >>>...How on earth could an intelligent person with only a > little knowledge of the "Dark Lord" think that he would react > any differently than he did?<<< > > bboyminn: > > >>> > Snape bears some responsibility in the Potter's deaths, he is > afteral in a /nasty/ business, but I don't think he should be > held responsible for the choices made by Voldemort. On the other > hand, Wormtail clearly and unquestionably conspired with Voldemort > ... > > Not saying any of this cast of characters is blameless, just trying > to keep their degree and nature of blame in prespective.<<< > > > > brady: > > I agree with Steve here. Snape is less guilty of the Potters murder > than Peter. I am not saying he is not guilty at all. He knew that > something nasty would happen ... > > However intelligent Snape is (or might have been), ..., there > is NO WAY what-so-ever to have known at the time of passing on > the information to LV, that the Potters' child would definitely > be born as July fades!! ...edited... > bboyminn: Excellent post by Brady. He agrees with me, so, of course it's excellent (humor). I'm not trying to counter anything that Brady said, I'm just going to expand on some aspects of the prophecy. The Prophecy is VERY MUCH subject to interpretation. For example, it refers to 'the Dark Lord', but it doesn't say which Dark Lord. The people who hear the Prophecy are just assuming that it is the current darkest of Dark Lords, but Voldemort is never named, so attributing the Prophecy to him is nothing but speculations and interpretation; though certainly in hindsight a correct interpretation. Second, the Prophecy doesn't say someone /will be/ born at the end of the up-coming month of July, it simply says as the seventh month dies. Not 'will be born' as the seventh month dies, just 'born as the seventh month dies'. If someone had been born 100 years prior at the end of July (or 5 or 10 years later), then the Prophecy could just as likely have been about this person. The year is not specific, it is assumed that the Prophecy means the coming month of July, but that is never explicitely stated. Now it does say that 'The one with the power to vanquish the Dark Lord APPROACHES' and we can assume that means 'the One' is about to be born, but that is clearly just that ...an assumption. It could just as easily mean that the person born 100 years ago at the end of July is traveling in this direction. Voldemort made a long series of assumptions about what the Prophecy said, assumptions and interpretations that Snape couldn't have possibly known at the time. AGAIN, that statement still doesn't absolve Snape. He was a nasty person in a nasty business that clearly and without question will always lead to nasty consequences, and he has to face that nastiness and be held accountable. But, again, comparing Snape's action specifically to Petigrew's, I don't see how any can fail to see the difference between them. Snape was doing his nasty job unaware of the nature of the /specific/ consequences. Wormtail/Petigrew on the other hand betrayed his best and probably only friends because he was a coward. He sold the Potters to Voldemort like a sack of cheap potatoes, and has shown no remorse for his actions. Snape and Dumbledore, on the other hand, claim that Snape is deeply remorseful of the consequence of his actions. Big difference as far as I'm concerned. Steve/bboyminn From exodusts at yahoo.com Fri Jan 27 05:30:19 2006 From: exodusts at yahoo.com (exodusts) Date: Fri, 27 Jan 2006 05:30:19 -0000 Subject: Thestrals be the key / Owls In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147131 > Caro: > > I think it hasn't been mentioned yet, that the thestrals may be > > a way for Harry to get hold of the horcruxes left. They can find > > any Place, even if you Don't know where it is. > La Gatta Lucianese: > Or owls! Harry could just tell Hedwig, "Go find me those horcruxes!" exodusts: Wouldn't he have to name a specific person for the owl to find? From zgirnius at yahoo.com Fri Jan 27 19:56:59 2006 From: zgirnius at yahoo.com (zgirnius) Date: Fri, 27 Jan 2006 19:56:59 -0000 Subject: VA/H=Mx13+RP? (was: Was the eavesdropper unimportant to Harry?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147132 > Jen: It paints a picture of Snape as awfully naive not to wonder for > a moment what Voldemort would do with the information. Naive or > worse, unconcerned. I'm all for the possibility that the Snape Harry > knows is not the Snape who joined the DE's, became bitter and battle- > scarred, and possibly permanently altered himself practicing > Occlumency so much. Still, naivete as a young man doesn't strike me > as being in-character. Unconcern does, though. zgirnius: I'm not clear what you mean by 'unconcern'. It could be unconcern, as in 'so Voldemort will go kill some baby or babies...so what?' Or, unconcern as in simply not bothering to work out the consequences for anyone other than himself (the Dark Lord may be pleased I brought him a prophecy only Dumbledore knows). The second seems to me more consistent with great remorse on learning how the Dark Lord had interpreted the prophecy (in other words, if he's hit over the head with the consequences to others, he does care). From maria8162001 at yahoo.com Fri Jan 27 11:11:41 2006 From: maria8162001 at yahoo.com (Maria Vaerewijck) Date: Fri, 27 Jan 2006 03:11:41 -0800 (PST) Subject: Plan for events on the Tower (was Re: Do any list members think Dumbledore might have asked Snape to kill him?) Message-ID: <20060127111141.47024.qmail@web53209.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 147133 Julie: >> So I agree that there was no plan for the specific events on the Tower, just a contigency agreement about who would live or die if the worst possible thing came to pass. Which it did. << maria8162001: I don't think there was no plan about the events in the tower. I think we are forgetting or overlooking one or 2 important things. The reason, I believe that everything that happen on the tower was all planned, is first, it was on that evening that DD chose to asked Harry to accompany him to look for the horcrux. And I believe both DD and Snape know something's going to happen that evening (Draco letting the DEs in) and they know where it's going to happen. Second, if it wasn't planned, why did Snape stun or attack Prof. Flitwick when he came to fetch Snape to help fight the death eaters? And how did he know directly that DD, Draco and some DEs were on the tower? Why did DD chose to land on the tower, when they could have landed anywhere inside Hogwarts and use the front door to go inside the castle? That would be more safe both for him and Harry to use the front door as it was far from the figthing. But the things that stays with me and in my opinion it is important as the readers doesn't pay much attention to these, and I cannot get them out of my mind are the first 2 questions. Why did Snape attack Prof. Flitwick if there was no plan and if he really doesn't know that the moment has come(the plan)? And how did he know that DD and Draco and perhaps other DEs are on the tower? Any idea? I really would love to hear some ideas about these questions, which have been nagging me. I don't like Snape since from the first book but I don't think he's that evil. I guess, there's more something about that events on the tower. I've also read Mr. Rickman's (Snape) interview and he said also that there is more to Snape than what you see or how he look, something like that. maria8162001 From stevejjen at earthlink.net Fri Jan 27 20:53:33 2006 From: stevejjen at earthlink.net (Jen Reese) Date: Fri, 27 Jan 2006 20:53:33 -0000 Subject: VA/H=Mx13+RP? (was: Was the eavesdropper unimportant to Harry?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147134 Jen: > > It paints a picture of Snape as awfully naive not to wonder for a > > moment what Voldemort would do with the information. Naive or > > worse, unconcerned. I'm all for the possibility that the Snape > > Harry knows is not the Snape who joined the DE's, became bitter > > and battle-scarred, and possibly permanently altered himself > > practicing Occlumency so much. Still, naivete as a young man > > doesn't strike me as being in-character. Unconcern does, though. > zgirnius: > I'm not clear what you mean by 'unconcern'. It could be unconcern, > as in 'so Voldemort will go kill some baby or babies...so what?' > Or, unconcern as in simply not bothering to work out the > consequences for anyone other than himself (the Dark Lord may be > pleased I brought him a prophecy only Dumbledore knows). The > second seems to me more consistent with great remorse on learning > how the Dark Lord had interpreted the prophecy (in other words, if > he's hit over the head with the consequences to others, he does > care). JenR: I originally meant your first example: Snape was aware a baby would be involved and essentially handed him/her over to Voldemort on a silver platter. After reading Brady's post more closely and Steve's recent post, the ambiguity of the prophecy wording makes me wonder if your second thought isn't closer to the truth. But it IS still hard for me to think "born to those who have thrice defied him, born as the seventh month dies" isn't a dead giveaway there's a baby involved. As for Snape's remorse though, I'm tired of hearing about Snape from Dumbledore. When he explained to Harry about Snape's 'mistake' and his 'deep remorse', I could imagine Snape telling Harry the story and how he might present his actions. I'm not sure his feelings of deep remorse would come through in the retelling. It may be completely accurate Snape was horrified to discover how Voldemort intepreted the prophecy, but Harry has reached the end of his rope for trusting Snape just because Dumbledore does. JKR promised some fallout in book 7 due to an emotional mistake by Dumbledore. My first choice for the mistake is Dumbledore not recognizing Harry won't respect & trust Snape simply because Dumbledore insists on "Professor Snape" and because Dumbledore trusts him. Words on behalf of someone else fall flat when actions don't add up. Or when right actions are so submerged under resentful and hateful words they appear ambiguous. Jen From bartl at sprynet.com Fri Jan 27 21:14:56 2006 From: bartl at sprynet.com (Bart Lidofsky) Date: Fri, 27 Jan 2006 16:14:56 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Does anyone have any ideas as to how Snape was spying for the OOTP? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <43DA8D50.7050504@sprynet.com> No: HPFGUIDX 147135 latha279 wrote: > Although I am a DDM!Snape person, I really found it very disturbing > that two people (apparently people whom DD respected a lot) - Bones > and Vance - were killed following Snape's information passing to LV! Bart: Excuse me, but do we in fact know this to be true? And, if it is true, do we know that Snape's information caused the deaths? And, finally, if Snape's information did cause the deaths, do we know that this was not information that he was told to give to LV, which was thought to be harmless? The answers to all, three, at least according to canon, is "no". Bart From raeangelavhs at msn.com Fri Jan 27 20:54:59 2006 From: raeangelavhs at msn.com (raeangelavhs) Date: Fri, 27 Jan 2006 20:54:59 -0000 Subject: Concerning the prophecy and Snape. Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147136 >From "Re: VA/H==Mx13+RP? (was: Was the eavesdropper unimportant to Harry?)" Jen: "I'm wondering where he was in the stages of learning Occlumency and whether he would have been able to hide the information from Voldemort even if he tried? I keep thinking about his comment, 'fools who wear their hearts proudly on their sleeves...weak people in other words--they stand no chance against his powers!' I still think that comment referred to Snape himself at one time, and his solution was to learn Occlumency as he told Harry." raeangelavhs: I've been thinking about this and just wondered what other people think about it. Did DD tell L&J that the prophecy had been made or just that LV was after their son? If he told them about the prophecy, does that detract from Lily's sacrifice (after all it could then just be like any auror "taking a bullet" for the Chosen One rather than a mother dying for her child only because of her love)? Also, how can we question Snape's loyalty after he told DD about the prophecy? LV certainly wouldn't have asked him to tell and if Snape did so anyways he must be on DD's side and know Occlumency already contrary to the above post because LV wouldn't forgive something like that. If Snape was truly loyal to LV he wouldn't have protected Voldy's greatest threat like that. From rkdas at charter.net Fri Jan 27 21:45:43 2006 From: rkdas at charter.net (susanbones2003) Date: Fri, 27 Jan 2006 21:45:43 -0000 Subject: ESE!Lupin condensed and Lupin and Sirius replies In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147137 Pippin, You have provided so much information and have thought about your theory so completely, it's quite something. What was just an unhappy hunch on my part, well you have done all the work, or almost all the work. You answered my last concern (how can such a sympathetic character as Lupin be the spy?) very completely with the post that brought all the pieces together but I would like to explore motivation a little further if you don't mind. It seems to me that the theory is a little unclear on Lupin's motivation. I know that LV offers so many dark creatures the freedoms they've lacked in the WW but how can a person who wasn't born a werewolf, who'd been raised as a wizard, who was treated with fairness, even kindness by DD, how can that person betray that? He's definitely had a miserable existence under the leadership of the WW, unable to obtain or hold a job (save the year at Hogwarts) but he's also an intelligent person. The system he's in stinks, but it's better than the system LV would organize, which seems to be just a reign of terror and chaos. Can we really see enough motivation for Lupin, just being angry at the treatment werewolves have gotten? I know you can come back with guns blazing and say "JUST?" but I keep thinking, the alternative to the corrupt and horrible racist WW would be no improvement, just revenge. Certainly Lupin can't be motivated by revenge only. He's smart enough to know LV would and did kill his own family. No one is safe with him. It would be the finishing touch of the theory to explore motivation a bit more. I have been reading OOTP and 15 year old James and Sirius were more than a bit flip about Lupin's condition. In the "worst memory" they seemed to think it a fine joke to have a werewolf for a friend. I could see Lupin truly resenting them but finding in the scheme of things, they were much better than any alternative. But is that enough motivation to turn spy? Must understand, I find your theory explains a lot. Just need to understand the front end a little better. Thanks, Jen D. still wading through the swamp in OOTP. From mmmwintersteiger at yahoo.com Fri Jan 27 20:56:52 2006 From: mmmwintersteiger at yahoo.com (mmmwintersteiger) Date: Fri, 27 Jan 2006 20:56:52 -0000 Subject: Plan for events on the Tower (was Re: Do any list members think Dumbledore might have asked Snape to kill him?) In-Reply-To: <20060127111141.47024.qmail@web53209.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147138 > Julie: > >> So I agree that there was no plan for the specific events on > the Tower, just a contigency agreement about who would live or > die if the worst possible thing came to pass. Which it did. << > > > maria8162001: > I don't think there was no plan about the events in the tower. I > think we are forgetting or overlooking one or 2 important things. > The reason, I believe that everything that happen on the tower > was all planned, is first, it was on that evening that DD chose > to asked Harry to accompany him to look for the horcrux. And I > believe both DD and Snape know something's going to happen that > evening (Draco letting the DEs in) and they know where it's going > to happen. Hi all, New to this group so I'm kinda jumping in to the middle of things. Please bear with... I really like the idea of a contingency plan but I have been wondering if maybe I am just too naive. Obviously DD has magical power and knowledge so great that LV considers him his one true enemy. So why would DD choose to die in place of Snape? I think 2 reasons, 1st-the destruction of the Slytherin ring may have done more damage to DD than just the "dead" arm. It may have weakened him like a cancer and so he was just biding his time until his death could really mean something. 2nd-Keeping Snape alive would ensure that OOTP could still use his expertise. I have unresolved issues about this though. Snape will no longer have the guise of a Hogwarts Professor to hide behind therefore meeting with the OOTP would become increasingly diffucult and risky. However in killing DD he would most likely gain a trust that LV would have never given another thus creating a huge weakness. We cannot forget that Harry was not allowed to utter unforgivable curses. While Snape was cruel in the deflection I believe he was protecting Harry from doing irreversible evil and that shows loyalty to DD. Could it be possible that DD had a horcrux of his own? I only wonder this because in the cave he is uttering things that sound to me as if he was forced to do harm to another. I don't remember if a horcrux had to be formed from malice or only if you took another's life? It seems that any murder, mistake, forcible or malicious, would be enough to split one's soul. michelle From raeangelavhs at msn.com Fri Jan 27 21:04:15 2006 From: raeangelavhs at msn.com (raeangelavhs) Date: Fri, 27 Jan 2006 21:04:15 -0000 Subject: A list of Book 7 Clues Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147139 I think it would be a good idea to compile all that we know about the future book seven (from interviews of JKR, etc). It should be factual and worded to accuracy if not actually quoted. We could also include speculations that are firmly based and set up in the previous books (ie Harry will see parents' graves, PP's debt will be fufilled, we'll learn definatively which side Snape is on). When I read posts, a lot of people include a sentence that refer to things JKR has promised for the final book of the series, but these clues would probably clearer if we could organize them together as a file or something. Just a suggestion. raeangelavhs From mmmwintersteiger at yahoo.com Fri Jan 27 21:18:08 2006 From: mmmwintersteiger at yahoo.com (mmmwintersteiger) Date: Fri, 27 Jan 2006 21:18:08 -0000 Subject: Thestrals be the key / Owls In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147140 > > Caro: > > > the thestrals may be a way for Harry to get hold of > > > the horcruxes left. They can find any Place, even if you > > > Don't know where it is. > > > La Gatta Lucianese: > > Or owls! Harry could just tell Hedwig, "Go find me those > > horcruxes!" > > exodusts: > Wouldn't he have to name a specific person for the owl to find? Come on now guys, if Horcruxes were that easy to find they wouldn't be very safe, now would they? michelle From mmmwintersteiger at yahoo.com Fri Jan 27 21:50:12 2006 From: mmmwintersteiger at yahoo.com (mmmwintersteiger) Date: Fri, 27 Jan 2006 21:50:12 -0000 Subject: Concerning the prophecy and Snape. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147141 > Jen: > "I'm wondering where he was in the stages of learning > Occlumency and whether he would have been able to hide the > information from Voldemort even if he tried? I keep thinking about > his comment, 'fools who wear their hearts proudly on their > sleeves...weak people in other words--they stand no chance against > his powers!' I still think that comment referred to Snape himself > at one time, and his solution was to learn Occlumency as he told > Harry." > > raeangelavhs: > Did DD tell L&J that the prophecy had been made or just > that LV was after their son? If he told them about the > prophecy, does that detract from Lily's sacrifice (after all it > could then just be like any auror "taking a bullet" for the Chosen > One rather than a mother dying for her child only because of her > love)? Also, how can we question Snape's loyalty after he told DD > about the prophecy? LV certainly wouldn't have asked him to tell > and if Snape did so anyways he must be on DD's side and know > Occlumency already contrary to the above post because LV wouldn't > forgive something like that. If Snape was truly loyal to LV he > wouldn't have protected Voldy's greatest threat like that. L&J must have known their son was in danger otherwise why would they have gone to such extreme efforts to hide their selves and Harry from LV? Being aware of the mortal danger that your child is in does not take away from Lily's sacrifice because she is a mother. There is no other choice than to do all you can to save your son. The magical protection would have been there whether or not she knew he was in danger-there are no stipulations and amendments to that kind of old magic (imo). Aside from that, I believe that Snape has been studying Occlumency from a young age. Considering LV's power I don't think he would have survived much if he wasn't a pro at hiding his true feelings. Not just because he was a "double agent" but also because he seems very sarcastic and doubtful. I don't think LV would have appreciated either quality in a DE. michelle From newbrigid at yahoo.com Fri Jan 27 21:55:48 2006 From: newbrigid at yahoo.com (Lia) Date: Fri, 27 Jan 2006 13:55:48 -0800 (PST) Subject: A list of Book 7 Clues In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20060127215548.25024.qmail@web31715.mail.mud.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 147142 raeangelavhs wrote: > I think it would be a good idea to compile all that we know > about the future book seven (from interviews of JKR, etc). > It should be factual and worded to accuracy if not actually > quoted. Lia says: I think that just such a compilation can be found on the Harry Potter Lexicon website. Check here: http://www.hp-lexicon.org/about/books/book_6-7.html ---Lia From ShylahM at gmail.com Fri Jan 27 22:22:15 2006 From: ShylahM at gmail.com (Shylah) Date: Sat, 28 Jan 2006 11:22:15 +1300 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Concerning the prophecy and Snape. In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <403e946f0601271422p260cf8dbkde632ec488050c0b@mail.gmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 147143 >On 1/28/06, raeangelavhs wrote: > > raeangelavhs: > I've been thinking about this and just wondered what other > people think about it. Did DD tell L&J that the prophecy had been > made or just that LV was after their son? If he told them about the > prophecy, does that detract from Lily's sacrifice (after all it > could then just be like any auror "taking a bullet" for the Chosen > One rather than a mother dying for her child only because of her > love)? Also, how can we question Snape's loyalty after he told DD > about the prophecy? LV certainly wouldn't have asked him to tell > and if Snape did so anyways he must be on DD's side and know > Occlumency already contrary to the above post because LV wouldn't > forgive something like that. If Snape was truly loyal to LV he > wouldn't have protected Voldy's greatest threat like that. Tanya Thinking back to that time and not being exactly sure when Dumbledore knew the news of the prophecy had gotten back to LV. It's highly likely that the race would have been on to discover which child it referred to. I have always wondered what the Potters were doing for protection before they cast the secret keeper spell a week before the attack. Possibly at the time Harry was born they hadn't yet defied LV three times. Was LV doing the rounds to see who would manage to fit the requirements? If he was, then possibly Snape would have been keeping Dumbledore informed. Dumbledore did refer to the person who tipped him off about LV making the connection as being one of his more useful spies. Possibly LV with his method of rewards would have involved Snape in at least parts of the hunting in regards to the prophecy. From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Fri Jan 27 22:56:34 2006 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Fri, 27 Jan 2006 22:56:34 -0000 Subject: VA/H=Mx13+RP? Snape's Culpability? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147144 > Magpie: > > I mean, from his pov think of it this way. He's on Voldemort's > > side. His goal is to support him. So > > think of if Snape was working for DD and he heard a prophecy that > > said that someone who would destroy him could be found in such and > > such a place. He'd naturally pass that information on as a > > supporter of DD. > > Jen: There's a small problem with the comparison because Snape is > working toward an evil end. The actions are the same, the ends are > not. Culpability-wise, I mean. Alla: Jen, thank you. Of course for DE Snape it would be a natural impulse to pass the information to Voldemort. I am just not getting how it makes him less culpable. Yes, he did passed the Prophecy to his boss, but the boss is the bad guy, REALLY bad guy, so if the argument is something along the lines that Snape did not know that the murderous evil maniac will act upon the information that the child would be born who can defeat him, as murderous evil maniac would act? I just don't see at all how Snape could not have known that. I am NOT buying stupid Snape and I am also not sure how Carol's argument fits into the picture at all. Snape was thinking in terms of rewards and punishment? Okay, but how is that mutually exclusive of Snape understanding that Voldemort will go for a kill ASAP? IMO of course. > Jen: My initial reaction to Snape-the-eavesdropper was he would know > exactly what it meant and was a scumbag for turning over a baby to > Voldemort. He's a smart guy and should know how prophecies work and > what kind of person Voldemort is. Alla: Indeedy again :-) It is still my reaction. :-) Jen: > Here's my 'but', though. When you mention his age it makes me think > twice about it. Not that he doesn't have blame in what eventually > happened to the Potters (which no one seems to be arguing anyway), > age would be a poor excuse. However, I'm wondering where he was in > the stages of learning Occlumency and whether he would have been > able to hide the information from Voldemort even if he tried? Alla: That is an interesting point, Jen, but are you arguing that Voldemort "forcefully" so to speak, took information from Snape. I honestly do not remember any support for this argument. Could you refer me to canon, please? > Jen: It paints a picture of Snape as awfully naive not to wonder for > a moment what Voldemort would do with the information. Naive or > worse, unconcerned. Still, naivete as a young man doesn't strike me > as being in-character. Unconcern does, though. Alla: Agreed > Ginger: I'm just throwing up a possibility. Not saying > it is canon, but a possibility. Alla: Ginger, thank you SO much for making me laugh (in a good way - I thoroughly enjoyed reading your post) Ginger: > So I think we can assume that 1)LV sent Snape to spy on DD; 2)LV > expected something to be said that would interest him; and 3)LV > expected a full report from Snape. Alla: Since I believe that Voldemort was the one who send Snape to school to spy on Dumbledore as a teacher, I can definitely buy your possibility. Ginger wrote: > We know LV believed the prophecy, but did Snape? > > Snape doesn't seem to be the type who goes in for all the Trelawney > hype. If Snape it one thing, it's logical. (See the Book One > Obstacle Course.) Prophecy, Schmophecy. LV wants info! And it's > Snape's job to get it. > > So what does Snape hear that night? Nothing. So Snape goes to give his report on ...nothing. Exit Snape, turn the page, and suddenly, LV is believing the > prophecy. Is that how it happened? Probably not. But it is a > possibility. Alla: Snort. Okay, I CAN buy that Snape did not believe in Prophecy, absolutely, BUT the problem I see with it is that if Snape thought that it was something unreliable and not worth mentioning, then why would he tell it to Voldemort AT ALL? I mean, really if it is something unworthy of Voldie's time, surely Snape can give to him something more interesting than Trelawney's proclamations? Steve wrote: > But, again, comparing Snape's action specifically to Pettigrew's, I > don't see how any can fail to see the difference between them. Snape > was doing his nasty job unaware of the nature of the /specific/ > consequences. Wormtail/Petigrew on the other hand betrayed his best > and probably only friends because he was a coward. He sold the Potters > to Voldemort like a sack of cheap potatoes, and has shown no remorse > for his actions. Alla: I cannot speak about anybody else, but I am not comparing Snape and Peter's crimes. Sure, Peter's crime is more specific towards the Potter and huge. But I blame Snape as SNAPE, without comparing him to Peter. Is Peter guiltier in Potters' death? IF Snape is loyal to Dumbledore and indeed showed remorse, sure Peter is ( guiltier I mean). If Snape is Evil, than please disregard my statement. BUT without Snape Peter's betrayal may have never happened. Not because Peter would be a wonderful person, but because Voldemort may not have felt a need to come to Peter in the first place. Snape served as a catalyst for those events and for THAT I sure blame him. Steve: Snape and Dumbledore, on the other hand, claim that > Snape is deeply remorseful of the consequence of his actions. > > Big difference as far as I'm concerned. Alla: Oh? Could you point me to the canon, where SNAPE claims that he is deeply remorseful? I had been waiting to read this for quite some time. JMO, Alla From briandumby at yahoo.com Fri Jan 27 23:00:02 2006 From: briandumby at yahoo.com (brian dumby) Date: Fri, 27 Jan 2006 15:00:02 -0800 (PST) Subject: ESE!Lupin condensed and Lupin and Sirius replies In-Reply-To: <1138392069.2323.78323.m29@yahoogroups.com> Message-ID: <20060127230002.69806.qmail@web35909.mail.mud.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 147145 > Pippin: > The identity of Wormtail *is* an "official" mystery, at least until > Lupin says, "Peter is Wormtail." At that point it seems solved -- > but what if it isn't? BD: **** Quote from POA, Chapter 22 OWL POST AGAIN: "You think the dead we loved ever truly leave us? You think that we don't recall them more clearly than ever in times of great trouble? Your father is alive in you, Harry, and shows himself most plainly when you have need of him. How else could you produce that particular Patronus? Prongs rode again last night." It took a moment for Harry to realize what Dumblefore had said. **** Quote ends So DD knew who was Prongs and so would I believe about the other names of the marauders group. > Pippin: > I'm saying Voldemort knows about Wormtail's debt, but discounts > its significance as the kind of "ancient magic of which he knows, > which he despises, and which he has always, therefore, underestimated > -- to his cost" OOP ch 37. BD: I am not sure he knows. Legilimency might not mean you can read everything that's there. You can get everything you want - so if and when LV read PPs mind what all was he interested in? He has twice failed to understand deep/ancient magics .. Lily's sacrifice and Harry's protection at Dursleys' So what says that he won't do it again. **** Quote again from POA "This is magic at its deepest, its most impenetrable, Harry. But trust me... the time may come when you will be very glad you saved Pettigrew's life." *** Quote ends BD From horridporrid03 at yahoo.com Fri Jan 27 23:10:07 2006 From: horridporrid03 at yahoo.com (horridporrid03) Date: Fri, 27 Jan 2006 23:10:07 -0000 Subject: Will there be an ESE!character in Book 7? (was:How to contstruct an ESE!plot...) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147146 > > >>Jen, on a kick of thinking things will be fairly straighforward in > the end and wondering how the series will read 5, 10, 20 years from > now when many of the mysteries are no more. Betsy Hp: I'm curious, how many people on this list think a character will be revealed as ESE in book 7? I've always assumed that JKR will throw in an all mighty twist and have someone that Harry trusted turn out to be ESE. Whether it's a Weasley (a twin!), or a member of the Hogwarts teaching staff (McGonagall?), or a Gryffindor he'd always thought was decent (erm... Collin?), I'm expecting some sort of dun-dun-DAH moment complete with "I've always despised you!" and "No, it can't be!". But, following this thread it seems like most of you all (not Pippin, obviously ) think the masks have all been removed and we know who's on what team. That book 7 will consist of a scavenger hunt broken up by a melee or two and a final showdown between Harry and Voldemort. (Oh, a bit on Snape.) Am I right about this, or are there others still expecting a few more twists? Betsy Hp, who'll be quite disappointed if JKR doesn't make her gasp at least once in the final book From horridporrid03 at yahoo.com Fri Jan 27 23:32:42 2006 From: horridporrid03 at yahoo.com (horridporrid03) Date: Fri, 27 Jan 2006 23:32:42 -0000 Subject: VA/H=Mx13+RP? Snape's Culpability? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147148 > >>Alla: > > Of course for DE Snape it would be a natural impulse to pass the > information to Voldemort. I am just not getting how it makes him > less culpable. Yes, he did passed the Prophecy to his boss, but > the boss is the bad guy, REALLY bad guy, so if the argument is > something along the lines that Snape did not know that the > murderous evil maniac will act upon the information that the > child would be born who can defeat him, as murderous evil maniac > would act? I just don't see at all how Snape could not have known > that. I am NOT buying stupid Snape and I am also not sure how > Carol's argument fits into the picture at all. > Betsy Hp: Ah, but you are buying the mustache twirling bad guy, I think. The thing is, the bad guys don't think they're the bad guys. Remember, Snape was working for Voldemort while Regulus was working for Voldemort. This was when Voldemort's popularity was at its zenith (per Lupin, IIRC) so this is when Voldemort was at his most charismatic and charming. So Snape wouldn't have had to be full on stupid to not see Voldemort as a "murderous, evil maniac". He just had to be a touch naive, and perhaps, a touch vulnerable. Voldemort wasn't running around killing babies and eating puppies, he was fighting a "righteous war" to bring the WW back into its "glory days" or some such thing. (Per Lucius.) Snape had bought the party line, as Regulus had. It was only when you got so far into the inner-circle that the killing babies and eating puppies part of the equation became clear. (I'm not sure how far "in" is, but Regulus was a Death Eater for a certain period of time before he learned of methodologies that turned him and his folks off Voldemort.) And, as I believe Steve and Brady have pointed out, there was nothing in the part of the Prophecy Snape heard to suggest that an actual baby was involved. It kind of sounded like a champion was being called forth, two equals meeting on a field of battle. Nothing shameful in that, nor in giving your side a heads-up that the other side already had. Snape *was* culpable in falling for the "glory days" stuff. I think he should have known better. Especially as the son of a muggle and, as I suspect, a former friend of a muggle-born. I also wouldn't be surprised if Snape didn't have twinges of suspicion that something was rotten in the state of Voldemort. Hence his deep remorse (as I suspect). *But*, this culpability *pales* in comparison to Peter turning his friends over to the butcher and helping bring their baby in for the feast. Peter *knew* this was about baby killing. And he knew he was setting his best friend up to die. The only mitigating factor would be if he was tortured and broken. And that's a slight bit of mitigation there, IMO. Because Peter had to actively campaign and manipulate, I believe, to gain the role of Secret Keeper. Betsy Hp From lucianam73 at yahoo.com.br Fri Jan 27 23:52:58 2006 From: lucianam73 at yahoo.com.br (lucianam73) Date: Fri, 27 Jan 2006 23:52:58 -0000 Subject: Hermione dead and MAJOR SPOILER to "The Sixth Sense" movie Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147149 Please anyone who hasn't seen the movie `The Sixth Sense', directed by M. Night Shyamalan and starred by Bruce Willis, be aware that a MAJOR SPOILER for that movie follows. It will completely spoil your enjoyment of said movie. Also if anyone comments please keep a spoiler alert in your subject. Now on with it. This will contain one quote from PoA, all other quotes from Chapter Beyond the Veil, OotP. I might have posted this here before, if so I apologize. I don't really remember, since I've been offline for ages, due to a mix of vacations and operations, and for some reason I didn't touch anything Harry Potter since the release of the GoF movie (Ralph Fiennes possibly scared me too much, har har). I'm very happy to be back, btw, and hope you'll forgive me returning with this crazy post. Well, anyway, my suspicion, mind you, NOT theory, since I don't consider my idea well-fundamented enough to support a theory, is that Hermione might have died in OotP, during chapter Beyond the Veil. Before someone yells `Wouldn't one expect she'd stopped walking around!'), I clarify that I'm not considering the possibilities of zombie-Hermione or a Death-Eater polyjuicing as Hermione. She's been around, yes, since chapter The Second War Begins of OotP and she's been In Character enough to rule out those possibilities. Time-travel is my excuse for the Hermione-Is-Dead Idea. I'm not going into the details that prompted me to come up with this, unless someone would like me to, because it would take too much space and time and I'd rather go through the idea itself now. Take a look at both these quotes from OotP, the action takes place in the Time Room, after the cabinet containing the hourglasses is accidentally burst appart by Neville, and also after one of the Death Eaters got his head caught in the bell jar. (The hourglasses presumably were Time-Turners, since the cabinet kept bursting apart and mending itself, endlessly _ or at least until some competent wizard arrived after the battle to clean up the mess.) `They had run halfway toward it when Harry saw through the open door two more Death Eaters running across the black room toward them. Veering left he burst instead into a small, dark, cluttered office and slammed the door behind them. Collo_ began Hermione, but before she could complete the spell the door had burst open again and the two Death Eaters had come hurtling inside. With a cry of triumph, both yelled, `IMPEDIMENTA!' Harry, Hermione and Neville were all knocked bakward off their feet. Neville was thrown over the desk and disappeared from view, Hermione smashed into a bookcase and was promptly deluged in a cascade of heavy books, the back of Harry's head slammed into the stone wall behind him, tiny lights burst in front of his eyes, and for a moment he was too dizzy and bewildered to react.' Well, of course I can't be sure, but I think that's a description of THE `infamous death in book 5', or perhaps a second one. JKR didn't say only one character would die in that book (at least that I know!). > > * SPOILER ALERT * > > > > * SPOILER ALERT * > > > > * SPOILER ALERT * In `The Sixth Sense', we see Willis's house invaded by a burgler, and we see the burgler shoot him. Next scene, it's a totally new situation for Willis's character, and we see him talking to Haley Joel's character so the movie goes on. Of course, the novelty of the situation resides in the guy being dead_ he died from that bullet, we saw him get shot. He appears in the next scene (and along the movie) because he kid can see, and talk to, ghosts. I think the `Willis being shot' scene is very similar to the `bookcase accident'. As in the movie, we know Hermione crashed into a bookcase_ violently, of course, since the spell knocked her off her feet_ and was covered by heavy books falling on top of her. The scenes differ, of course, because we see Willis take a bullet, which obviously injures him, and though we see the violence of Hermione's `accident' we can't see her injuries. When I first read that scene, back in the summer of 2003, I went `OMG! It's her, she's dead!' because the bookcase scene was an alarming image. Being told by the press to expect a major character death in OotP, every time a (major) character had an accident, I though they could be The One Who Dies. So I worried for Hermione. Only to see her cry `Silencio!' to a Death Eater's face, two paragraphs later. No mention of her crawling painfully from under the heavy books that had `deluged' her. No mention of one hair out of place. And all too fast! How come she was there, under the books, seconds before, and now she's not under the books anymore, and producing spells? What happened here? Did the director said `Cut!' right after the cascade of books scene, and a it's new scene altogether, exactly like the `Cut!' between Willis taking a bullet and his ghostly appearance in the street Haley Joel lives? Funnily enough, `Hermione-who-was-suddenly-not-under-the-books-anymore' was cursed moments later, and Harry and Neville are terrified, thinking she might be dead. The readers who feared for Hermione getting hurt by the heavy books fear for her, AGAIN. Fortunately, she has a pulse. Isn't it funny she had two possible death (or injury) scenarios during eight paragraphs? Isn't it odd her fiery crosses had faded from the doors when Harry gets to the circular room, although we `know' she's alive because Neville felt a pulse? Also note that, apart from that pulse, Hermione never shows any sign of life again in that chapter; and she is left in the Brain Room, with Ginny and Luna who are both unconscious and Ron who is attacked by the brain; we are specifically informed of what room Dumbledore steps from some time later, when he enters the Death Room, and it's the Brain Room. I suggest the reason why Hermione shouts `Silencio!' so suddenly, and seems to have crawled out from under the book pile (and stood up, and got hold of her wand ) so uncannily fast is the existence of two Hermiones in that precise moment in time, in that little office by the Time Room. I don't know_ and that's why I can't call this idea a proper theory_ if the second Hermione, the first one obviously being present-time-Hermione, a Hermione-from-the-past or from-the-future. I'm inclined to think she's from the future, but I'm really really bad at Time Travel logistics, as they make my head hurt. I don't know which Hermione died_ was it present-time-Hermione, crushed under the books and left unattended for a long time, possibly the cause of death being a head injury? Was it the Time-travelling-Hermione, killed by the purple curse that passed right across her chest, and Neville didn't really get a pulse after all or she died a few minutes after, while Harry carried her? If Hermione-under-the-books died it's obvious someone (Dumbledore?) found her body and kept the truth from everyone. If Hermione-in-the-Brain Room was dead, presumably Dumbledore knew, somehow, that there was a living Hermione in the office by the Time Room and he switched them. He could have done it easily, since everyone else in that room was unconscious or off their nut. Either way, I figure Dumbledore knows. Here's a different quote, from Hermione actually: "Professor McGonagall told me what awful things have happened when wizards have meddled with time Loads of them ended up killing their past or future selves by mistake!" chapter Hermione's Secret, PoA We don't know what happens when a past or future self is killed, and neither do we know what happens when a present self is killed, and past or future self remains (well actually I think there's no difference, is there?). Maybe we'll learn in Book 7. Suppose what happens is, the self that remains takes up the place of the other in the time during which the action takes place, and life continues from that point on? As I said I'm terrible at Time-Travelling, but here's an example: if you visited your future self in, say, 2011, and one of your selves died, the remaining self would go on regardless. If the self that died was your future self, you (the Time-Traveller) would take his place and never go back to your "present' (2006) again. And what would happen in 2006? You'd be gone forever once you turned that Time-Turner. I'm almost done, but there's still this little puzzle here: "The Death Eater shook his ugly head again, trying to clear it, but before he could pull himself together again, it began to shrink back to babyhood once more There was a shout from a room nearby, then a crash and a scream." Couldn't the `room nearby' be the little office by the Time Room, where Hermione's bookcase crash took place? Why is it happening earlier? Is Time being meddled with already? Could the cupboard with the Time-Turners have sent the whole Time Room travelling? Sorry about that, I know it sounds even more deranged, but there it is. The little office is just one door from Harry as he hears that shout, crash and scream, and we are given very specific directions to its location. It seems quite fishy. Oh, and one last thing, I don't think Hermione knows any of this. Otherwise, she would have been completely distressed in HBP. Maybe when one of your selves dies in a Time Travel context, you take its place so completely, you lose all the memories that don't belong to the 'time in Time' you have been fixed to. Including all memories from the Time Travel that brought you to your new 'present'. Lucianam From Schlobin at aol.com Sat Jan 28 00:12:49 2006 From: Schlobin at aol.com (susanmcgee48176) Date: Sat, 28 Jan 2006 00:12:49 -0000 Subject: Assuming they survive... In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147150 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "allies426" wrote: > > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Steve" wrote: > > > > > > Harry Potter's Wizards Brew - All-Natural Suprisingly Strong > Ginger > > Brew (ginger beer or ale depending on where you live - no > alchohol). > > > > Harry Potter's Ginger Cream Ice Cream - better than you might > expect. > > Made by Fortescue. Plus monthly variations; raspberry swirl ginger > > cream, strawberry swirl ginger cream, etc.... > > > > > What fun... I totally agree that Fred and George are natural businessmen, will make a ton of money (even as Lord Voldemort is killing people right and left), and will support his parents. (He has already given Molly a lovely and expensive gift for Christmas). Ron may well invest in their business -- Ron is what my father used to say is a "slow maturer"....it's hard to see his future, except of course as Hermione's husband, and father to another bunch of bushy haired red haired kids..... Harry doesn't need the money, and is not the businessman type. He will become head of the Auror office, and a famous Auror. That's what he wants to be, and after Lord V is destroyed, there will still be plenty of DEs to mop up... Either Ginny or Hermione will become Minister of Magic...Hermione has shown a genius for political warfare (being the person who shifted public opinion of Harry through the Quibbler interview), immediately understood Umbrage's role at Hogwarts from her first speech, and like DD is appropriately concerned with witches/wizards' mistreatment of Goblins, Giants, Elves, etc.... (that fatuous statue in the lobby of the MoM! -- no wonder it was destroyed)....Madam Bones may return (having disappeared rather than really been murdered) and may precede Hermione or Ginny as MoM....Ginny may also become an Auror, she may have no taste for administration.... Neville is clearly destined to be a Herbology professor at Hogwarts, although it's possible he may die in Book 7. Susan (Want to join Harry Potter for Grownups over 40? Email me at SusanGSMcGee at aol.com) From horridporrid03 at yahoo.com Sat Jan 28 00:41:32 2006 From: horridporrid03 at yahoo.com (horridporrid03) Date: Sat, 28 Jan 2006 00:41:32 -0000 Subject: Draco and Harry In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147151 > >>Betsy Hp: > > It's the difference between a character purposefully being an > > antagonist and a character tripping into the role through > > misunderstanding and misspeaking. The first is pretty straight > > up and down, but the second leaves all sorts of interesting > > wiggle room. It's the space JKR left herself by going with the > > second option that I find so significant. > >>Alla: > OK, I am sorry, but I need more clarification, if you don't mind. > I am guessing we will disagree anyways, but I have no idea what > are you talking about. > What space JKR left for herself? She portrays Draco as prejudiced > against ALL muggleborns. What wiggle room she gave herself by > portraying Draco that way? > > So, let me ask you again, why do you think it is better that Draco > insults all Muggleborns than if he would specifically insults Lily? Betsy Hp: Pippin touched on this a little bit in her response. There's a huge difference between the personal and the generic. Draco's beliefs about the "wrong sort" are completely generic. They've been taught to him by his parents and unchallenged by his sheltered upbringing. But what Draco has been taught is wrong. Only his ignorace keeps that belief going. Any competent muggleborn proves his parents' beliefs a lie. If Draco had had a personal reason to hate muggleborns (say Lily Evans killed his brother, or some such thing) than it'd be a harder belief to change. But since his belief is based on a fairly shaky foundation it will only take a minor amount of self-examination to destroy. JKR took pains to show that Draco is parroting his parents. He's trying to befriend, or at least be friendly to, Harry and he says the wrong thing. It displays Draco's prejudices (and the fact that such prejudices exist), but she's careful to show that his prejudices aren't built on anger ("She killed my brother!") or something personal like that. This leaves room for Draco to, say, see Hermione as someone intelligent enough to get ideas from and open for the type of instruction Dumbledore gives on the Tower. It leaves Draco open for change. > >>Gerry: > So because Draco accidently insulted Harry's mum he should be > excused? The only accident here is Draco not verifying thouroughly > enough that Harry was the right kind. Poor Draco, messed > up his chance to be friends with Harry Potter because he > accidently let slip how much he despises people like Harry's > mum. Betsy Hp: Hmm, I didn't get that Draco "despised" anyone in that scene. He just saw some type of people as lesser than. Which is not a good thing, obviously, but not as passionate (or as personal) as despising someone. And I'm not excusing Draco's insults at all. I'm just saying that Draco *did* try to befriend Harry, and that his beliefs are something that can change. And that JKR makes it fairly obvious that Draco's beliefs can be changed. Oh, and I'm also pointing out that the chance for Draco and Harry to be friends was ruined by misunderstanding and misspeaking. Draco would have approached Harry differently, I believe, if he'd had known it was Harry Potter he was speaking to. > >>Betsy Hp: > > That's part of the reason why it was necessary for Harry to > > *not* befriend Draco too early on in the series, I think. > > Because through his association with Harry, Draco would have had > > his ignorant beliefs challenged. And HBP wouldn't have been > > nearly as interesting. > Alla: > But that is why Harry did not want association with Draco, no? > BECAUSE of his beliefs? Betsy Hp: I think it was more Draco's confidence in the shop (Harry responds badly to intimidation) and then Draco's rudeness to Ron. I'm not sure that Draco's beliefs really overtly entered into it until CoS. Draco came across as a snob in PS/SS. It was CoS that brought out his bigotry. > >>Alla: > What are you basing your assumption on that Draco could be > a "swell person"? > Betsy Hp: I'm basing my understanding of Draco's character on what JKR has written. And she's shown that he can be determined, intelligent, loyal, funny, brave, creative and insightful. His most negative trait is his bigotry. And frankly, I think that's a fairly easy fix. It's why I think that if Draco *had* become friends with Harry in their first year, Draco would have moved beyond his bigotry years ago. Hard to think ill of a people that includes your friend's mom. > >>RP: > I see this 'Draco is a female type of bully' argument a lot, and I > must confess never quite getting it :-) > > But when has he verbally abused someone who is unable to either > retaliate or ignore him? When has he ever verbally abused someone > who is speech challenged, or not very good at the language Draco > speaks? Also, Draco is often the less popular among the two > parties voicing a less popular opinion, so he doesn't even > function like a 'mean girl' sort in my mind. Betsy Hp: I guess the closest he comes is in PS/SS when he tells Neville that he's not good enough for Gryffindor. Draco hit Neville where he lived with that comment (insightful of Draco to know that would hurt). I suppose Ron could be seen as the other "victim" of Draco's "mean girl". At least, Draco gets a rise out of Ron more consistently than anyone else he picks on, I think. But you're right. Draco doesn't pick on people weaker than him. Neville is his age, he's a pureblood (an equal in Draco's mind), and we learn that Neville is made of much sterner stuff than Harry gives him credit for. And Ron is in the more powerful position, being best-friends with the "Chosen One" and all. (Plus there's the older brothers.) > >>RB: > > So yeah, while Draco undoubtedly has the foulest mouth in > Hogwarts, is mean and ill-spirited, I just can't call him > a 'bully' with a straight face. Judging from the fact that Draco > keeps pestering the three people who'd given him hell time and > again, I really doubt he goes after those who he knows are weaker > than him (that's how Dudley works), I think he goes after those he > really dislikes. Not saying that makes him an angel, of course :-D Betsy Hp: But don't you just admire his spirit? I mean, Draco *never* wins. He's constantly getting smeared by greater numbers, etc., etc., but he keeps coming back for more. He just. won't. quit. I agree though that Draco really doesn't cut it as a bully. JKR could easily make him one, but she doesn't. Also significant, I think. Betsy Hp, raising an eyebrow. Significantly. ;-) From miles at martinbraeutigam.de Sat Jan 28 00:48:49 2006 From: miles at martinbraeutigam.de (Miles) Date: Sat, 28 Jan 2006 01:48:49 +0100 Subject: Hermione dead and MAJOR SPOILER to "The Sixth Sense" movie References: Message-ID: <010901c623a4$9b50cb90$14b2a8c0@rechnerchen> No: HPFGUIDX 147152 lucianam73 wrote: > If Hermione-under-the-books died it's obvious someone (Dumbledore?) > found her body and kept the truth from everyone. If > Hermione-in-the-Brain Room was dead, presumably Dumbledore knew, > somehow, that there was a living Hermione in the office by the Time > Room and he switched them. He could have done it easily, since > everyone else in that room was unconscious or off their nut. Either > way, I figure Dumbledore knows. Oh, and one last thing, I don't think Hermione knows any of this. > Otherwise, she would have been completely distressed in HBP. Maybe > when one of your selves dies in a Time Travel context, you take its > place so completely, you lose all the memories that don't belong to > the 'time in Time' you have been fixed to. Including all memories from > the Time Travel that brought you to your new 'present'. Miles: The idea is fun to read, yes, crazy - really, it is, but I like it. But I have a few major problems with it. 1) As you mentioned yourself, there is no hint for a timetravel after PoA. So, if your construction would appear to be true, JKR would have introduced it without any clue - that's not her style, isn't it? 2) There would be no reason for a Past!Hermione to travel into the future. She is not a Seer, and there is no Seer she is in contact to, who could have predicted a future situation in such an exact way, that she would have decided to timetravel to this specific point of time in the future. A Future!Hermione would have tried to either prevent the Ministry Mission or to alarm the Order (or Aurors) much earlier to prevent the mortal peril for Harry, the other students, and the Order members. And to prevent Sirius's death. But we know, that Hermione neither succeeded to avert the travel (she would have found a way if she knew what would happen - she is Hermione), nor succeeded to ease the Ministry situation. 3) If I put my problems of 2) out of the way, my question is - so what? What would it add to the plot if either a Future! or Past! or Present!Hermione had died in OotP, being replaced by any of these three Hermiones without realising it - and without any consequences for her, Harry, Ron or the remaining parts of the HP story? To construct it, JKR would need to write may lines without any purpose for her plot - and we all know her plot needs many lines to be complete in book 7. My final problem is, by the way, that writing about time travelling makes English grammar horribly complicated, especially if you have to use subjunctive forms as well. But I must admit that this objection is slightly OT. Miles From kking0731 at gmail.com Sat Jan 28 00:56:14 2006 From: kking0731 at gmail.com (Kathy King) Date: Fri, 27 Jan 2006 19:56:14 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Will there be an ESE!character in Book 7? (was:How to contstruct an ESE!plot...) In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147153 Betsy Hp, who'll be quite disappointed if JKR doesn't make her gasp at least once in the final book Snow: Couldn't have said it better! I find myself reiterating the fact that JO couldn't give 'us' too much information to pour over in book six lest we figure out (with our fine tooth combs) a bit too much. Like you Betsy, I have always enjoyed, more than anything else about her writing, the fact that she can twist a story to the degree she does and doesn't lose credibility in the way that she does it. The clues are there looking back. JKR is nothing short of brilliant in the way she can fill 6 novels giving clues without giving information; it's phenomenal in my opinion. Book seven will be, without a doubt in my mind, beyond sensational. No matter who is, was, or will be on which side of the DD/Voldemort regime in the end, I trust her to give us the logical answers to why. It's going to be a book that you don't want to pick up (because it holds the ending) and yet, once you have it in your hesitant clutches, bodily functions wont tear you away from it. Great thoughts Betsy! Snow [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From wrigs21 at yahoo.com Sat Jan 28 00:36:42 2006 From: wrigs21 at yahoo.com (wrigs21) Date: Sat, 28 Jan 2006 00:36:42 -0000 Subject: Harry's eyes are the key to his defeating Voldemort *SPOILER Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147154 Lilly had a way of seeing the good in people when they couldn't.......and we all know Harry has Lilly's eyes.....perhaps this may mean that Harry will see the good in someone (Wormtail or Draco) and they will somehow help Harry in defeating the Dark Lord......I am betting on Wormtail......because he still has a life debt to Harry! wrigs21 From lucianam73 at yahoo.com.br Sat Jan 28 01:45:02 2006 From: lucianam73 at yahoo.com.br (lucianam73) Date: Sat, 28 Jan 2006 01:45:02 -0000 Subject: Will there be an ESE!character in Book 7? (was:How to contstruct an ESE!plot In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147155 > > Betsy Hp: > I'm curious, how many people on this list think a character will be > revealed as ESE in book 7? I've always assumed that JKR will throw in > an all mighty twist and have someone that Harry trusted turn out to be > ESE. (snipped) > That book 7 will consist of a scavenger hunt broken up > by a melee or two and a final showdown between Harry and Voldemort. > (Oh, a bit on Snape.) Am I right about this, or are there others > still expecting a few more twists? > > Lucianam: I think some major revelations are needed in Book 7, else it won't be a satisfying end for the series. Of course it'll have its own subplot (if we consider each book's plot a a subplot in The Great Scheme or The Great Plot Developing Throughout All Seven Books), and it seems to be the Horcrux hunt thing. I don't think Snape's storyline will be solely capable of sustaining Book 7, as it is NOT a subplot in the way the Triwizard Tournament and the Re-opening of the Chamber were subplots, but rather a part of the Big Plot. And as the Big Plot is concerned, there's a lot missing, so I'd expect its secrets to be revealed in the last book. I'm partial to the ESE!Lupin theory, because not only it fits in the Big Plot (I remember reading in one of Pippin's posts, what is the excuse for two good grown ups around Harry? It's more logical if one of them is evil) but also because Lupin's lines are often dubious, or made seem so by some comment the author adds, AND Tonks was really out of character in HBP. Amortentia is what immediately comes to mind. I usually don't comment for ESE!Lupin because Pippin always does, and since I agree with most of it there isn't much for me to post. But I find the possibility of Lupin having murdered Sirius very interesting, because it fits the events of the DoM battle very well. I still can't see what his reasons could be, though. In the Death Room a jet of green light nearly misses Sirius, as he and Harry duck from it; both being right across the room from Tonks. Tonks falls down, presumably struck by Bellatrix's spell. We're not told who shot the jet of green light, perhaps there's loads of them flying around, perhaps it's a purposeful AK sent by someone. Perhaps Tonks, who was right across the room, saw who was that someone. A few minutes later, Sirius falls through the veil, struck by a second jet of light, the color of which is famously not known, and JKR never says it was Bellatrix's curse anyway. Lupin is around immediately, to hold Harry back and keep him from going after Sirius. If we pay attention to Lupin's location, well, if he is truly ESE! he could very well be the author of the second jet of light, the one that hit Sirius squarely in the chest. And if he did that, wouldn't he be the more plausiblke suspect of the FIRST jet of light, the green one Harry and Sirius had to duck? If so, it's likely Tonks saw him, and there you have a very good reason for feeding her Amortentia. A person caught in the web of infatuation and obssession very likely would never tell anyone the object of her passion is a murderer. I like ESE!Lupin theory because it fits into canon very well, and it would be a fantastic plot twist for the end of the series. It would give Lupin a purpose in the present plot. I hate to think the Marauders were only created for the sake of the Prank and as a "environment" for Snape, so that the remaining Marauders were left to hang around like bothersome psychos who are better off dead (not MY opinion) or kindly professors who don't do a thing for three books in a row. Isn't Wormtail lucky he has a Wizard's Debt to Harry, so he has a plot excuse for his existance beyond the graveyard scene in GoF? Lucianam From rdoliver30 at yahoo.com Sat Jan 28 01:15:22 2006 From: rdoliver30 at yahoo.com (lupinlore) Date: Sat, 28 Jan 2006 01:15:22 -0000 Subject: VA/H=Mx13+RP? (was: Was the eavesdropper unimportant to Harry?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147156 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "juli17ptf" wrote: > > Really, can anyone say Harry's limited suffering from Snape's > nastiness even remotely compares with Cedric suffering a > lifetime taken away from him? Snape's actions may take place > over years, and Wormtail's may have been a single act, but > that act is like comparing dozens of stinkbombs to a nuclear > explosion. > I can say so, and do. Mainly based on the fact that Cedric is not suffering at all. Death is a one time phenomenon. Therefore the fact that Snape persistantly and systematically abuses Harry over years DOES have great bearing. Stinkbombs to a nuclear explosion? Give me the center of the explosion any day over being locked for years in a room of stinkbombs. Lupinlore From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Sat Jan 28 02:08:54 2006 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Sat, 28 Jan 2006 02:08:54 -0000 Subject: How to make Remus look evil , when he is not /Snape in the Shrieking Shack In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147157 > Pippin: > So why was he trying to murder/execute Peter, if his desire for vengeance > is no excuse? What's wrong with the dementors, or taking Peter > to the castle? Sirius himself suggested that before. > Alla: You misunderstood me, I think. IF the plan to execute Peter came to the logical conclusion of killing Peter ( let's forget about not having the story we have if that would have happened for a second), I may have judged Remus and Sirius a bit more harshly, OR not, I am not even sure about this hypothetical. But I definitely think that after all that Peter did, after all that he made these two guys suffer ( Sirius and Remus) I mean, I certainly think that DESIRE to avenge the dead Potters and alive, but probably half -insane Sirius IS sufficient excuse for wanting to kill Peter. Am I making sense? I MAY have judged them more harshly ( or not as I said above) if they ACTED upon their desire to kill Peter, BUT I certainly NOT judge them too harshly for THOUGHTS about killing Peter. > Alla: > > And I am not sure what are you talking about "Snape's world being > > turned upside down"? Are you talking about Tower events or Shrieking > > Shack? > > Pippin: > I am talking about the Shrieking Shack. Snape has just heard two > men whom he thinks are murderers trying to feed Harry and co. some > cock and bull ( or should I say stag and rat) story, about being > animagi, and Sirius not working for Voldemort, in the midst of which > Lupin admits that he has been taking advantage of Dumbledore's trust, > just as he did when he was a boy. > > That in itself would be enough to make DDM!Snape furious. But it would > be staggering for Snape to hear that Sirius was innocent, especially > if he tried to warn James not to trust Sirius, and that was the reason > another SK was picked, so he goes into violent denial about everything. Alla: Well, Pippin, in that case you will probably be surprised, BUT I agree with you. Actually, used to agree would be more factually correct. IF Snape whom we saw in Shrieking Shack will turn out to be Dumbledore Man Snape , truly loyal to him AND the one who felt sincere remorse about Potters death AND in addition to all that Snape tried to warn James and Lily not to trust Sirius and had no clue about Peter, THEN sure I feel for Snape that night. I will tell you even more - for quite some time, Shrieking Shack used to be one of the few moments in the books, where I used to pity Snape ( I mean I wanted to smack him of course, but felt for him too). In fact, I used to pity all of the participants of the events that night. Here, I thought, three guys, who were all hurt so very badly in the different ways by the events which occurred twelve years ago and who all went ballistic, basically insane because their pasts came to hunt them. I always felt that Sirius had the most objective reasons for going ballistic because he just spent twelve years with Dementors, BUT I absolutely thought that Snape ( loyal to Dumbledore, truly remorseful Snape ;)) has enough reasons to not be quite sane that night too. SO, I think that evaluating Shrieking Shack scene on its own, I was being quite consistent, really. The worlds of Sirius, Remus, and Snape and of course Harry COULD have been turned upside down. Except that ever since OOP Snape's picture started shifting right in front of my eyes. NO, of course I did not truly doubted Snape loyalty to the Light yet, I am NOT that good in making predictions :). Except when Harry started feeling worse after Occlumency lessons, I started having my doubts .... sometimes. But of course this is Harry we are talking about, and he is always wrong about Snape, right? Right? So, I pushed my doubts far away and they were not that big, really. Except that after rereading Shack scene I started doubting that Snape TRULY did not have any clue about Peter . IMO he was standing there long enough that he could have heard about animagus transformations. Yes, I know it is ambiguous, but I think it is a possibility. So, Snape who thinks that Sirius is a murderer, I can feel for and while dislike, still sort of understand his insane desire to feed innocent man to dementors. But Snape who may KNOW that Sirius is innocent, and Peter is not, NOPE nothing excuses what he wanted to do to Sirius and Remus, in my opinion of course. I also started not being sure of Snape warning James about not trusting Sirius, because really all we have is "too arrogant to believe that he may be mistaken in Black" (paraphrasing, so apologies for possible misquotation) It can mean anything - FOR EXAMPLE - it cam mean that somebody else went to James and tried to warn him about Sirius and Snape LEARNED about it. And of course HBP came and honestly, I think I have sufficient reasons to greatly doubt Snape loyalty to Dumbledore. yes, I know all the arguments for him being loyal, but to me the fact that Dumbledore is not living anymore ( IMO of course) speaks greatly against it. And of course we have Snape supposed REMORSE which had been argued many times. The only problem I see with it is that Snape seems to be strangely silent on that subject. So, I think I have sufficient reasons to doubt that his remorse ever existed in the first place. To go back to my original point - the world of Snape, whom I described in the beginning surely could have been turned upside down and I would be lenient for him, except that I am not sure at all that such Snape ever existed. > Betsy Hp: > I'm curious, how many people on this list think a character will be > revealed as ESE in book 7? I've always assumed that JKR will throw in > an all mighty twist and have someone that Harry trusted turn out to be > ESE. Whether it's a Weasley (a twin!), or a member of the Hogwarts > teaching staff (McGonagall?), or a Gryffindor he'd always thought was > decent (erm... Collin?), I'm expecting some sort of dun-dun-DAH moment > complete with "I've always despised you!" and "No, it can't be!". > Alla: Not me, no. I am not expecting any major characters to turn out to be ESE!. I think there is enough to be dealt without additional villains uncovered. I am expecting DAH-DAH moments about Snape and how Harry will defeat Voldemort ( some simple elegant solution), I don't think that book seventh will have major mystery element in 'Who is the villain" and I am quite OK with it. I am not expecting Lupin, Twins or Mcgonagall to be Evil, not at all. The only thing I won't exclude is sort of a minor betrayal, although even such plot development is not a given, IMO. So, I would leave Colin or any secondary character on the list for possible ESE!persons. JMO, Alla From kchuplis at alltel.net Sat Jan 28 02:12:33 2006 From: kchuplis at alltel.net (Karen) Date: Fri, 27 Jan 2006 20:12:33 -0600 Subject: A Sirius question....(haha) Message-ID: <8AEDBBAA-8FA3-11DA-B08E-000393B04DDE@alltel.net> No: HPFGUIDX 147158 I was just thinking today of what a different Sirius we have in GoF from OoTP. In GoF, where while they feel that possibly LV is regaining strength it isn't thought to be an immediate threat, Sirius is constantly warning Harry to caution, yells at him for "taking risks" and going off with Viktor Krum and generally mother henning Harry almost as badly as Molly Weasley. In OoTP, where there is no longer any doubt that LV is back and bad and in a killing mood, Sirius is giving Harry the famous taunt "the risk is what would have made if fun for James". He's giving Harry almost the same kind of taunts that Snape is giving him. He's dreadfully depressed and moody alternating with great happiness. Definitely manic. Why the huge discrepancy? When now more than ever it is clear LV is back and coming for Harry, why does Sirius goad Harry? You want to work on a theory, there's one. Was Sirius really Sirius in OoTP? Did the real Sirius die? At any rate, there is sure a huge change in the character's attitude to Harry between the two books. kchuplis From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Sat Jan 28 02:30:19 2006 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Sat, 28 Jan 2006 02:30:19 -0000 Subject: A Sirius question....(haha)/Draco and Harry In-Reply-To: <8AEDBBAA-8FA3-11DA-B08E-000393B04DDE@alltel.net> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147159 Karen: > In OoTP, where there is no longer any doubt that LV is back and bad and > in a killing mood, Sirius is giving Harry the famous taunt "the risk is > what would have made if fun for James". He's giving Harry almost the > same kind of taunts that Snape is giving him. He's dreadfully depressed > and moody alternating with great happiness. Definitely manic. Why the > huge discrepancy? When now more than ever it is clear LV is back and > coming for Harry, why does Sirius goad Harry? Alla: Oh, we had great discussions in the past about Sirius being depressed and if I can find the links, I will send you some. I don't think Sirius goating Harry is a good thing, but I absolutely think that Sirius was very depressed. Think about it, he was stuck in the house, where he probably spend his darkest moments as a child and teen. He left at sixteen, NEVER came back. I absolutely blame the Noble House of Black for Sirius' condition in OOP. Also think about him never quite healed from PTSD, IMO. He was being NEEDED in GoF, he was concentrated on Harry and that is why he was feeling better, but in OOP he is back to being stuck, his nature demands action and he cannot act AT ALL, IMO. I definitely understand his condition. Again, Sirius should have not said those things to Harry, but I think that had he been in better mental state, he never would have done it. Karen: > You want to work on a theory, there's one. Was Sirius really Sirius in > OoTP? Did the real Sirius die? At any rate, there is sure a huge change > in the character's attitude to Harry between the two books. Alla: I used to be a member of SAD DENIAL ( theory which says that Sirius is really not dead), and even now even though I really know that he is dead, deep in my heart I still hope for that, although I know it is not going to happen. :) Who do you think died if not Sirius? > Betsy Hp: If Draco had had a personal reason to hate > muggleborns (say Lily Evans killed his brother, or some such thing) > than it'd be a harder belief to change. But since his belief is > based on a fairly shaky foundation it will only take a minor amount > of self-examination to destroy. Alla: Oh, thank you. I finally understood your reasoning. I completely disagree, but at least now I understand what you are talking about. In my experience such beliefs are VERY easy to install and REALLY hard to shake. > > >>Alla: > > What are you basing your assumption on that Draco could be > > a "swell person"? > > > > Betsy Hp: > I'm basing my understanding of Draco's character on what JKR has > written. And she's shown that he can be determined, intelligent, > loyal, funny, brave, creative and insightful. His most negative > trait is his bigotry. And frankly, I think that's a fairly easy fix. Alla: I guess I just don't know where in the books you found all that. I see a bully, a coward, the one who would do anything to crush the people and even animals who disagree with him. And of course a bigot, as we seem to agree, but as I said above I completely disagree that bigotry is an easy fix. I encountered PLENTY of bigots during my life back home and the ones whom I knew on the regular basis did not seem to change at all. Of course I did not felt compelled to know them better - as in what is hiding behind the surface of the bigot, since them thinking that people of my ethnicity are of the "wrong kind" and should just disappear did not exactly compelled me to know them better. But, who knows, maybe Draco's failed murder attempt was indeed a life changing experience and he would become a "swell person" as he portrayed in so many fanfics. JMO of course, Alla From AllieS426 at aol.com Sat Jan 28 02:34:08 2006 From: AllieS426 at aol.com (allies426) Date: Sat, 28 Jan 2006 02:34:08 -0000 Subject: Merope's Selfishness In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147160 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Andrea Grevera" wrote: > > > Yes she was depressed and didn't know where to turn but if she only asked > she would not have been left alone, Tom wouldn't have grown up in a muggle > orphanage, he wouldn't have turned rotten, he wouldn't have become LV and > we wouldn't have a story. > > Andie > Allie: Maybe, maybe not. I doubt that the entire character of Tom Riddle was due to his upbringing. Some of it was probably genetic. There's certainly enough evidence of "rotten to the core" in that family! He might have turned out just the same. From kking0731 at gmail.com Sat Jan 28 03:53:46 2006 From: kking0731 at gmail.com (Kathy King) Date: Fri, 27 Jan 2006 22:53:46 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: How to make Remus look evil , when he is not /Snape in the Shrieking Shack In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147161 Alla snipped miserably: It can mean anything - FOR EXAMPLE - it cam mean that somebody else went to James and tried to warn him about Sirius and Snape LEARNED about it. Snow: Wow! Alla! You may have hit the nail directly on the head. One scenario I've never even fathomed. Then again, you just gave ammo to ESE Lupin, which I know you are not very fond of, sorry. Snow [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From huntergreen3 at aol.com Sat Jan 28 05:03:55 2006 From: huntergreen3 at aol.com (huntergreen_3) Date: Sat, 28 Jan 2006 05:03:55 -0000 Subject: Flight of the Prince (was Re: How to make Remus look evil , when he is not) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147162 Pippin wrote: >> And that reminds me, don't you think it's strange that >> Snape, who never misses a chance to gloat, didn't gloat over >> Dumbledore? If he was really filled with hatred and revulsion, >> wouldn't he have made a speech about it? Gloated a little? >> Basked in the glory? Can you imagine Snape missing a chance >> to do that? What could have come over him? ;-) Alla replied: > No, Pippin, I don't find it strange at all, if what I believe is > true - namely that the underlying reason for Snape killing was > saving his own life ( I don't know what he is planning to do with > it - to serve bad or good guys), then Snape did not have TIME to > gloat. He wanted to leave Hogwarts and fast, before Order may > capture him or kill him. So, nope, I think it is very believable. Pippin again: >>No time for one teeny weeny gloat? Not even a "So long, sucker!" before he blew Dumbledore away? What was the rush? The Order was *losing* the battle on the stairs, that's why they sent for Snape in the first place. Of course, if you mean that Snape had to hurry away from the tower in order to call off the DE's before they did any more damage, I agree with you. :-)<< HunterGreen: I was just thinking about this the other day. The way Snape acts after he kills Dumbledore is completely inconsistent if he's actually a Death Eater. If Snape was, this whole time, faking with Dumbledore, the whole time only pretending to be on DD's side to stay out of Azkaban, in other words, if what he told Bellatrix at the beginning of HBP was true, than his murder of Dumbledore, and therefore outing himself as a "true DE" would be his glorious moment of triumph. But does give Dumbledore any last comments? Does he explain that he was on the side of the DEs the whole time? No. He doesn't say anything AT ALL. He kills Dumbledore, all the time acting (IMO) somewhat uncomfortable, and the next thing he says is "Out of here, quickly." But what's REALLY strange is when Harry is chasing him. Snape absolutely *loathes* Harry, and if he was ESE he would certainly enjoy the fact that he just killed Harry's mentor, AND that he'd hoodwinked Dumbledore for all that time. But does he brag about any evil things he's done? (such as sabotaging the occulmency lessons, or purposely waiting awhile to alert the order about Harry and Co possibly running off to the DoM [I'm not saying he did those things]). Does he at least mention that HE was the one who told Voldemort about the prophecy, setting in motion the chain of events that killed Harry's parents? No, he doesn't. What he does do, is mock Harry's ability to do nonverbal spells and make fun of James. So, pretty much what he does any other time. Even the first time Harry calls him a coward, his reaction is only: --[HBP, chpt 28, pg 602/3, us ed] "Fight back," Harry screamed at him. "Fight back, you cowardly--" "Coward, did you call me, Potter?" Shouted Snape. "Your father would never attack me unless it was four on one, what would you call him, I wonder?" -- Which seems pretty pededstrian, considering the situation. Compare that to his over-the-top reaction when he was victorious in catching Sirius (or so he thought at least). -- "KEEP QUIET, YOU STUPID GIRL!" Snape shouted, looking suddenly quite deranged. "DON'T TALK ABOUT WHAT YOU DON'T UNDERSTAND!" A few sparks shot out of the end of his wand, which was still pointed at Black's face. Hermione fell silent. "Vengeance is very sweet," Snape breathed at Black. "How I hoped I would be the one to catch you...." "Up to the castle?" said Snape silkily. "I don't think we need to go that far. All I have to do is call the dementors once we get out of the Willow. They'll be very pleased to see you, Black... pleased enough to give you a little kiss, I daresay..." -- Certainly gloating there. He's taking a lot of joy in the situation too. Something that we DO NOT see in the Dumbledore murder scene in HBP. If he's a DE, than this is his greatest moment, he is getting rid of the (second)biggest thorn in Voldemort's side. He's killing the man who favored James, Sirius and Harry, someone who he'd have to hate to kill (unless, of course, there is something else going on). He doesn't even take the opportunity to hurt Harry a little bit. Sure, Voldemort didn't want Harry *killed*, but he would begrudge a little torture would he? Harry is actively ATTACKING Snape, if he threw a stupify or something at him, would it really matter? Snape even STOPS one of the other Death Eaters from torturing Harry. In fact, the only time Snape harms Harry (other than tossing him backward a few feet), is when Harry brings up Dumbledore. --[pg 604] [Harry]:"Kill me like you killed him, you coward--" "DON'T--" screamed Snape, and his face was suddenly demented, inhuman "CALL ME COWARD!" -- And then, Harry feels something "whiplike" hit him in the face. Harry called him a coward just a page before and Snape didn't seem bothered at all, now suddenly it vexes him enough to make him seem "demented" and cause him to curse Harry, even though he had deflected every one of Harry's curses without harming a hair on the boy's head. The difference is that Harry mentioned Dumbledore this time. Snape certainly does not react like someone proud of what he had just done. He's, rather, quite angry with killing Dumbledore being called cowardly. If he was a seasoned DE, murdering Dumbledore when he was wandless and lying on the ground weakened doesn't take much courage (unless you've never killed before, like with Draco), BUT, if there was some arrangement made ahead of time with Dumbledore and Snape, something to do with the unbreakable vow, and Snape HAD to kill Dumbledore to fulfill his end (assuming that Dumbledore talked him into it and that's what their argument was about in the forest), then the action being called cowardly would certainly angry him. Just like if someone called Harry a coward for feeding Dumbledore the potion. Reading this chapter closely, Snape's behavior does not point to a man who is proud or happy with what he just did. To be honest, I was still on the fence about Snape's motivations until I took a closer look at his actions here, and now I can't see him as an active DE at all. Now, if he was just acting to save his own life, well, I don't really see that either. Why would he bother saving his life, if all that layed ahead of him was a life with the Death Eaters? The only reason that would make any sense is if he WANTED to re-join them (or had never left), which does not seem to be the case at all. I don't think there can be a gray area here. -Rebecca/HunterGreen (who is ridiculously behind on reading posts) From AllieS426 at aol.com Sat Jan 28 06:13:47 2006 From: AllieS426 at aol.com (allies426) Date: Sat, 28 Jan 2006 06:13:47 -0000 Subject: Flight of the Prince In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147163 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "huntergreen_3" wrote: > > But what's REALLY strange is when Harry is chasing him. Snape > absolutely *loathes* Harry, and if he was ESE he would certainly > enjoy the fact that he just killed Harry's mentor, AND that he'd > hoodwinked Dumbledore for all that time. But does he brag about >any evil things he's done? (such as sabotaging the occulmency >lessons, or purposely waiting awhile to alert the order about Harry >and Co possibly running off to the DoM [I'm not saying he did those > things]). Does he at least mention that HE was the one who told > Voldemort about the prophecy, setting in motion the chain of events that killed Harry's parents? No, he doesn't. > >And then, Harry feels something "whiplike" hit him in the face. >Harry called him a coward just a page before and Snape didn't seem >bothered at all, now suddenly it vexes him enough to make him >seem "demented" and cause him to curse Harry, even though he had >deflected every one of Harry's curses without harming a hair on the >boy's head. The difference is that Harry mentioned Dumbledore this >time. Snape certainly does not react like someone proud of what he >had just done. Allie: I desperately want to believe DDM!Snape, for the multitude of reasons voiced by other listees (how cliche for Snape to be the true villain after all, how could Dumbledore be so wrong about Snape), and after I read your post I have to say that I agree with you 100%. ESE!Snape, the Snape we think we know, would be gloating and holding over Harry's head what he had done. "I killed that fool of a headmaster, I murdered your hero" etc. Actually, this would also be the time for him to gloat about causing JAMES's death, if he wasn't remorseful about it. He doesn't know if he'll see Harry again, Harry thinks he knows that Snape murdered Dumbledore, Harry is going to atttack him any time he sees him in the future - if now is not the time to gloat about James (James dying, not James himself), then when? An argument could be made for an OFH!Snape who does not hate Dumbledore but had no other way out than to kill him or die. (I won't make that argument, though. :) ) Speaking of in character/out of character: Shrieking Shack Snape had a line in the PoA movie that was SO in character that I wish it was in the book. Gloating to Sirius about the Dementor's Kiss, "It's said to be nearly unbearable to witness, but I'll do my best." I'll be so disappointed if Snape is not Dumbledore's Man... because after all, "The World is not divided into good people and Death Eaters." Allie From juli17 at aol.com Sat Jan 28 07:24:53 2006 From: juli17 at aol.com (juli17 at aol.com) Date: Sat, 28 Jan 2006 02:24:53 EST Subject: VA/H=Mx13+RP? (was: Was the eavesdropper unimportant to Harry?) Message-ID: <247.5f02f04.310c7645@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 147164 Jen wrote: JKR promised some fallout in book 7 due to an emotional mistake by Dumbledore Julie: I don't recall JKR saying this. Was it during an interview? Julie [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From zgirnius at yahoo.com Sat Jan 28 07:30:53 2006 From: zgirnius at yahoo.com (zgirnius) Date: Sat, 28 Jan 2006 07:30:53 -0000 Subject: Flight of the Prince (was Re: How to make Remus look evil , when he is not) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147165 > > HunterGreen: > I was just thinking about this the other day. The way Snape acts > after he kills Dumbledore is completely inconsistent if he's actually > a Death Eater. zgirnius: Yes, YES! I've written posts before about what Snape knew and did when, why he took the UV, and so on. But THIS is why I simply can't believe he's ESE. > HunterGreen: > He's, rather, quite angry with killing Dumbledore being called > cowardly. If he was a seasoned DE, murdering Dumbledore when he was > wandless and lying on the ground weakened doesn't take much courage > (unless you've never killed before, like with Draco), BUT, if there > was some arrangement made ahead of time with Dumbledore and Snape, > something to do with the unbreakable vow, and Snape HAD to kill > Dumbledore to fulfill his end (assuming that Dumbledore talked him > into it and that's what their argument was about in the forest), then > the action being called cowardly would certainly angry him. Just like > if someone called Harry a coward for feeding Dumbledore the potion. zgirnius: I have always felt it was even more than anger. The comparison to Fang in Hagrid's burning cottage suggests there is a great deal of emotional distress over wht he has done, as well. (As we might imagine Harry would feel, if it had turned out that the potion in the Cave killed Dumbledore). --zgirnius, hoping her efforts to add something to Rebecca's fine post resulted in a post that was not just 'Me, too!' From juli17 at aol.com Sat Jan 28 07:33:13 2006 From: juli17 at aol.com (juli17 at aol.com) Date: Sat, 28 Jan 2006 02:33:13 EST Subject: VA/H=Mx13+RP? (was: Was the eavesdropper unimportant to Harry?) Message-ID: <29b.46aa0fa.310c7839@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 147167 Julie wrote: > > Really, can anyone say Harry's limited suffering from Snape's > nastiness even remotely compares with Cedric suffering a > lifetime taken away from him? Snape's actions may take place > over years, and Wormtail's may have been a single act, but > that act is like comparing dozens of stinkbombs to a nuclear > explosion. > Lupinlore replied: I can say so, and do. Mainly based on the fact that Cedric is not suffering at all. Death is a one time phenomenon. Therefore the fact that Snape persistantly and systematically abuses Harry over years DOES have great bearing. Stinkbombs to a nuclear explosion? Give me the center of the explosion any day over being locked for years in a room of stinkbombs. Julie now: But you only have to go in the room with stinkbombs 3 times a week, not including summer, Christmas or Spring break. All the rest of the time you get to enjoy life, smell the flowers, laugh with your friends, etc. I know stinkbombs aren't very pleasant, but really you'd still rather be vaporized by a nuclear explosion? Julie (who still thinks Cedric suffered greatly by the premature end of his life and all that was lost with it, even if it wasn't physical suffering) [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From AllieS426 at aol.com Sat Jan 28 07:41:21 2006 From: AllieS426 at aol.com (allies426) Date: Sat, 28 Jan 2006 07:41:21 -0000 Subject: Hermione dead and MAJOR SPOILER to "The Sixth Sense" movie In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147168 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "lucianam73" wrote: > > > > > > > > * SPOILER ALERT * > > > > > > > > > > > > * SPOILER ALERT * > > > > > > > > > > > > * SPOILER ALERT * > Funnily enough, > `Hermione-who-was-suddenly-not-under-the-books-anymore' was cursed > moments later, and Harry and Neville are terrified, thinking she might > be dead. The readers who feared for Hermione getting hurt by the heavy > books fear for her, AGAIN. Fortunately, she has a pulse. > > Isn't it funny she had two possible death (or injury) scenarios during > eight paragraphs? Isn't it odd her fiery crosses had faded from the > doors when Harry gets to the circular room, although we `know' she's > alive because Neville felt a pulse? Also note that, apart from that > pulse, Hermione never shows any sign of life again in that chapter; > and she is left in the Brain Room, with Ginny and Luna who are both > unconscious and Ron who is attacked by the brain; we are specifically > informed of what room Dumbledore steps from some time later, when he > enters the Death Room, and it's the Brain Room. > > I suggest the reason why Hermione shouts `Silencio!' so suddenly, and > seems to have crawled out from under the book pile (and stood up, and > got hold of her wand ) so uncannily fast is the existence of two > Hermiones in that precise moment in time, in that little office by the > Time Room. > > I don't know_ and that's why I can't call this idea a proper theory_ > if the second Hermione, the first one obviously being > present-time-Hermione, a Hermione-from-the-past or from-the-future. > I'm inclined to think she's from the future, but I'm really really bad > at Time Travel logistics, as they make my head hurt. > > I don't know which Hermione died_ was it present-time-Hermione, > crushed under the books and left unattended for a long time, possibly > the cause of death being a head injury? Was it the > Time-travelling-Hermione, killed by the purple curse that passed right > across her chest, and Neville didn't really get a pulse after all or > she died a few minutes after, while Harry carried her? > Allie now: Interesting theory. I also wondered about the heavy bookcase falling on her. Then again, she's magical, so they're tough to kill. I have to work it out the Time Travel bit with details to see if it really works. Scenario 1: Hermione from the past arrives. Let's say she's from the previous year, otherwise she might look too young. We'll call her GoF Hermione. 1a. Present-time Hermione dies, and GoF Hermione takes her place, going forward in time. This means that at some point during the Triwizard Tournament, Hermione vanishes to the DoM. Since she is then going forward in time, she never returns to the Triwizard Tournament. We know from canon that Hermione has not disappeared. :) So it doesn't work this way. 1b. GoF Hermione dies, and present-time Hermione goes forward in time. Again, this would require 4th year Hermione vanishing and never returning. Also, what would be the point of this scenario? Conclusion: It couldn't be Hermione from the past that arrives in the DoM. Scenario 2: Hermione from the future arrives. Let's call her Book 7 Hermione (B7H). 2a. Present-time Hermione dies. That's it, that's the end of the story. Because if present time Hermione dies, she can't go forward in time to the point where she'll use a time turner. 2b. B7H dies. Present-time Hermione goes forward, lives two more years, uses a time turner, and then dies in the DoM. She would disappear forever as soon as she used the time turner. In order to make this plausible, there would have to be some BIG compelling reason for B7H to go to the DoM in the first place, some event that she wanted to change. (Do we assume that she knows she's going to die there?) Anyway, what event happens in that room that she changed by coming back? Anything could have happened, Dolohov was just yelling their location to the other DE's. Maybe the DE's would have arrived and killed Harry if Hermione hadn't silenced him. Harry dying would really be the only thing important enough to change, since he's the Chosen One. SO: the theory ONLY works if Hermione from the future arrives and then dies in the DoM, and the only reasons for her to do this is to save Harry. Hmm... this requires Harry to be dead in one timeline, up until the point where Hermione time travels to save him 2 years later, creating an alternate timeline. I don't think I believe it. (And I now have a picture in my head of Christopher Lloyd at a chalkboard showing a diagram to Michael J. Fox...) Also, to make it at-all plausible, you have to believe that the time travelling Hermione either arrived right into that room OR ran into it at the exact split second to shove herself out from under the bookcase before it falls. Hermione-under-the-bookcase has to be the one who dies, because we know that Hermione-who-received-the-purple- curse survives; it is for this curse that Madame Pomfrey is treating her (unless she's in on it too, but we won't go there). And Harry didn't see the 2nd Hermione arrive. I think the whole thing is just too complicated to work. That little office is interesting, though. All of those fascinating rooms around, and they battle it out in an OFFICE? Why is it there? Why would JKR mention it if it weren't important? Allie (I am one of those How-did-Harry-cast-the-Patronus-in-the-future-if- nobody-saved-him-in-the-past? people, BTW) From vuurdame at xs4all.nl Sat Jan 28 07:56:43 2006 From: vuurdame at xs4all.nl (festuco) Date: Sat, 28 Jan 2006 07:56:43 -0000 Subject: VA/H=Mx13+RP? (was: Was the eavesdropper unimportant to Harry?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147169 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "lupinlore" wrote: > I can say so, and do. Mainly based on the fact that Cedric is not > suffering at all. Death is a one time phenomenon. Therefore the fact > that Snape persistantly and systematically abuses Harry over years DOES > have great bearing. Stinkbombs to a nuclear explosion? Give me the > center of the explosion any day over being locked for years in a room > of stinkbombs. > Wow, maybe you should talk to some parents who had their child murdered and some parents who's child had a Snapelike teacher. Even better, maybe you should talk to some children who had such a teacher and ask whether they had rather be murdered as that would end years and years of suffering. It is interesting to know that according to your logic Harry would have been far better of being murdered by Quirrel in book 1, as that would have prevented years and years of Snape. But maybe, maybe, Harry - given the option, which he did because some really thougtless people saved his life despite his terrible suffering - would have preferred to live because he thought there is so much more to life than potions classes a couple of hours a week. Having friewnds, winning Quidditch games, learning magic, being in love. Funny to read all that should pale before the immense horror Snape. Why oh why does Harry love Hogwarts that much? That place where he is exposed to all these horrors for two classes every week? Gerry From bboyminn at yahoo.com Sat Jan 28 07:57:55 2006 From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Sat, 28 Jan 2006 07:57:55 -0000 Subject: Plan for events on the Tower (was Re: Do any list members think Dumbledore might In-Reply-To: <20060127111141.47024.qmail@web53209.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147170 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Maria Vaerewijck wrote: > > Julie: > > >> So I agree that there was no plan for the specific events on > the Tower, just a contigency agreement about who would live or > die if the worst possible thing came to pass. Which it did. << > > > maria8162001: > I don't think there was no plan about the events in the tower. I > think we are forgetting or overlooking one or 2 important things. > The reason, I believe that everything that happen on the tower > was all planned, is first, it was on that evening that DD chose > to asked Harry to accompany him to look for the horcrux. ... > Second, if it wasn't planned, why did Snape stun or attack Prof. > Flitwick when he came to fetch Snape to help fight the death > eaters? And how did he know directly that DD, Draco and some > DEs were on the tower? ...edited... > > > maria8162001 > bboyminn: Pardon my sarcasm, but let's look at this brilliant plan of Dumbledore's from a feasibility perspective. So, Dumbledore planned for the Twins to throw Montegue into the Vanishing cabinet so Montegue could discover its secret. Then he planned for Montegue to blab that secret to Draco who in turn figured out what it meant and blabbed to Voldemort who in turn set Draco the task of fixing the Vanishing Cabinet. Then on top of that Dumbledore planned for Voldemort to give Draco the additional task of killing Dumbledore. So, Dumbledore further manipulated the situation so that on one specific night, Draco would magically succeed at fixing the cabinet and the Death Eaters would be standing by to enter the castle. Mean while, Dumbledore drew Harry away from the castle on some hairbrained chase of a Horcrux that didn't exist, he poisoned himself, flew back to the castle just in time to find the Dark Mark and a fight in progress. Then Dumbledore planned for McGonagall to send Flitwick to fetch Snape, he planned for Snape to disable Flitwick. Then he planned for Snape to rush to the top of the tower to kill him. That's pretty damn excellent planning if you ask me. It is wonderful how Dumbledore was able to get all those Death Eaters, Draco, the Vanishing Cabinet, and Voldemort to cooperate with his plan. Yes, I am being sarcastic, but I have to ask, where is Dumbledore's plan? Exactly what part of this did he plan and control? How could Dumbledore possibly create a plan that involved the cooperation of Death Eaters and Voldemort? I believe there were some general contingency plans, I believe Dumbledore and Snape in conversation set priorities. But I simply can't fathom Dumbledore and Snape sitting around coming up with as wacky and hairbrained an idea as this. I don't believe that Dumbledore, far in advance, told Snape to kill him. I do believe that Dumbledore impressed on Snape that Harry was the top priority and that he should be protected at all cost. That Harry's life was far more valuable than even Dumbledore's. When the events at the top of the tower occurred, Snape was simply acting out obvious priorities and working the situation to the best advantage. Notice, that regardless of Snape's true loyalties, his action were to the best advantage of all concerned. That's the beauty of this well crafted scene. Snape could be loyal to anyone or no one, the scene gives us clues, so we can guess, but we can't really know until the last books is published. However, that said, the sequence of events is just to completely and totally unlikely to have been planned in advance by Dumbledore. In that moment, there could have been some Legilimens, and Dumbledore could have impressed on Snape that Draco and Harry must get away at any cost, and 'any cost' meant sacrificing himself. In that moment, Dumbledore's death was the path of least resistance. It was the path of least immediate damage and the best long term outcome. That makes both Snape and Dumbledore casualties of war. In war people die, that is a hard and terrible fact. In this war, Dumbledore died, but he died for a purpose, both short term and long term. Snape did what spies do, he chose the path that maximized the situation, and minimized the destruction. If people think Dumbledore had a plan, if people think Dumbledore and Snape conspired to kill Dumbledore, I'd like to hear a logical analysis of this plan and how it came about. It is easy to say Dumbledore planned for Snape to kill him, but I would like to hear the details of how that particular plan came into being, as it seems a very unlikely plan. Again, I can see general contingency plans, I can see a setting of priorities, but I simply can not see Dumbledore conspiring to that end. Just passing it along. Steve/bboyminn From vuurdame at xs4all.nl Sat Jan 28 08:47:02 2006 From: vuurdame at xs4all.nl (festuco) Date: Sat, 28 Jan 2006 08:47:02 -0000 Subject: Draco and Harry In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147171 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "horridporrid03" wrote: > But what Draco has been taught is wrong. Only his ignorace keeps > that belief going. Any competent muggleborn proves his parents' > beliefs a lie. If Draco had had a personal reason to hate > muggleborns (say Lily Evans killed his brother, or some such thing) > than it'd be a harder belief to change. But since his belief is > based on a fairly shaky foundation it will only take a minor amount > of self-examination to destroy. > Well, as soon as he sets foot in Hogwarts he gets to know such a muggleborn. And guess what: he absolutely hates her. The relevant quotes in COS are already mentioned so I am not going to repeat them, but I think a major factor in his hatred of Hermione is that she -is- the opposite of what she according to his prejudice should be. As for this kind of bigotry easy to root out, I watched a TV documentary a couple of days ago about Soul music and of course there were the marches for equal rights and the marches for white surpremacy. People new each other, people had all opportunities to examine their prejudices and do away with them, yet lots and lots of people clung to them with heart and soul. Just as in South Africa, just as in Europa in the times of the Jewish ghettos. The more empty a prejudice is, the harder it is to get rid of for lots of people, because their sense of self will not let them see themselves as the kind of person who is misled by something so completely ridiculous they should have seen through it immediately. Percy is an example of someone who refuses to go through this on a personal scale. Draco, who had six years of Hogwarts in when to know differently, did not change one bit. So I think it will take a huge amount of self-examination and courage for Draco to change Now I do think Draco may change but it needs to be well written to be believable. Gerry From mgrantwich at yahoo.com Sat Jan 28 12:42:28 2006 From: mgrantwich at yahoo.com (Magda Grantwich) Date: Sat, 28 Jan 2006 04:42:28 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Merope's Selfishness In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20060128124228.57243.qmail@web53112.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 147173 > BAW: > She could at least have left him at a WIZARDLING orphanage; > I'm sure they exist. (We don't know that they do, but we don't > know that they don't, and every society must make SOME > provision for babies and children whose parents > can't or won't properly care for them.) Yes, the WW probably does have orphanages, or did, in the 1920's. But those orphanages probably have magical ways to find a baby's relatives and I don't think that Merope would have wanted her child to fall into her father's or brother's hands. After all, her own childhood and existence with them was not exactly fun. She probably assumed that a muggle orphanage was safer for the baby. Magda __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com From willsonkmom at msn.com Sat Jan 28 13:04:27 2006 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Sat, 28 Jan 2006 13:04:27 -0000 Subject: Will there be an ESE!character in Book 7? (was:How to contstruct an ESE!plot...) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147174 Betsy: > > Betsy Hp, who'll be quite disappointed if JKR doesn't make her gasp at > least once in the final book > Snow: It's going to be > a book that you don't want to pick up (because it holds the ending) and yet, > once you have it in your hesitant clutches, bodily functions wont tear you > away from it. Potioncat: Thank you Betsy and Snow. It's nice to see a positive post about the next book. I've read quite a bit of the old posts. It's great fun to see the ideas that pop up as a new book approaches. Some very good, well thought out, canon based guesses are tossed out for discussion....and don't quite make it. It's just like a maze, where you turn down the most likely path, only to meet a dead end. I'm not even talking about the long, involved theories, but just the little guesses. Figgy will be the DADA teacher, she's not a Muggle.(Sort of right.) Sirius and Severus will have much more contact and it'll be great! (Well...not exactly). If Snape gets DADA we'll get to see some real fireworks between him and Harry. (wrong...no...right) Book 7 will have its own surprises and they'll be great too. I'm looking forward to book 7's arrival in just the same way I'm looking forward to my teenagers leaving the nest: I can't wait and I'm dreading it. From lucianam73 at yahoo.com.br Sat Jan 28 13:10:13 2006 From: lucianam73 at yahoo.com.br (lucianam73) Date: Sat, 28 Jan 2006 13:10:13 -0000 Subject: Hermione dead and MAJOR SPOILER to "The Sixth Sense" movie In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147175 > Miles said: > The idea is fun to read, yes, crazy - really, it is, but I like it. > But I have a few major problems with it. > 1) As you mentioned yourself, there is no hint for a timetravel after PoA. lucianam: I think there are hints. We are informed all Time-Turners have been destroyed, which seems to be a reverse hint but actually what this information does is remind the reader of the existence of Time-Travelling. Like that picture portraing an enormous pipe, with the phrase `This is not a pipe' written underneath. And what is that watch Ron got for Christmas if not a very complicated Time-Travelling device? I can't see what else it could be, and I think Dumbledore sent it (just like he sent the Invisibility Cloak in B1). > Miles: > 3) If I put my problems of 2) out of the way, my question is - so > what? What would it add to the plot if either a Future! or Past! or > Present!Hermione had died in OotP, being replaced by any of these > three Hermiones without realising it - and without any consequences > for her, Harry, Ron or the remaining parts of the HP story? lucianam: I agree it makes no difference to the plots of B6 & B7, since we haven't even realized she died, but it'll make a big difference in B7 if what happens is Hermione-from-the-future dying in that office. It means Hermione, in book 7, will never return from the Time Travel to the DoM because she died during it. I have no precise idea, of course, why JKR would kill off Hermione, other than the crappy reasons she gave us for killing off (?) Sirius: Harry must rely on his own resources, this is what happens in a war, etc. If she always meant to put Harry through REAL pain in her series, imo that can only be accomplished either by Ron or Hermione's deaths. After all, this is not the Trio's story, it's Harry's. It was always `Harry Potter and the PS/SS' etc, never `Harry, Ron and Hermione and the PS/SS' etc. I don't think Hermione is untouchable. > Allie said: > > Scenario 2: > Hermione from the future arrives. Let's call her Book 7 Hermione > (B7H). > > 2a. Present-time Hermione dies. That's it, that's the end of the > story. Because if present time Hermione dies, she can't go forward > in time to the point where she'll use a time turner. > > 2b. B7H dies. Present-time Hermione goes forward, lives two more > years, uses a time turner, and then dies in the DoM. She would > disappear forever as soon as she used the time turner. (snipped) > lucianam: Thanks!!! for putting the Hermione-from-the-future-dies scenario is plausible, simple words!! You have a practical mind and a great way with words! I cannot come up with a believable Hermione-from-the-past dying in the DoM battle scenario, either. But I don't know if JKR can. I also don't know what that bit about the `shout from a room nearby, then a crash and a scream' means. It strikes me as important, and it happens before Harry, Neville and Hermione try to hide in the small office. So, for justice's sake, I cannot disregard a bit of information just because it doesn't fit_ I must wallow in confusion. But we can always come up with a plausible explanation for those noises. Notice Harry yells, right after he hears the shout, crash and scream: `RON?' And then, `GINNY? LUNA?' Well, Ron's name came to mind first, so what if he really heard Ron's voice? More specifically he probably heard Time-Travelling Ron's voice, since B5 Ron was in the Planet Room floating about and `gone a bit funny'. And probably Harry heard a girl's voice, too, only he thought it was Ginny or Luna since Hermione was with him in the Time Room. The girl's voice belonged to Time-Travelling Hermione. > > Miles: (snip) > 2) There would be no reason for a Past!Hermione to travel into the future. She is not a Seer, and there is no Seer she is in contact to, > who could have predicted a future situation in such an exact way, > that she would have\decided to timetravel to this specific point of > time in the future. > A Future!Hermione would have tried to either prevent the Ministry > Mission orto alarm the Order (or Aurors) much earlier to prevent the > mortal peril for Harry, the other students, and the Order members. And to prevent Sirius's death. But we know, that Hermione neither > succeeded to avert the travel (she would have found a way if she knew > what would happen - she is Hermione), nor succeeded to ease the > Ministry situation. > Allie: (snipped) > In order to make this plausible, there would have to be some BIG compelling > reason for B7H to go to the DoM in the first place, some event that > she wanted to change. (Do we assume that she knows she's going to > die there?) Anyway, what event happens in that room that she > changed by coming back? Anything could have happened, Dolohov was > just yelling their location to the other DE's. (snip) > lucianam: Since the simplest explanation is often the true one, let's say B7H (I'll use Allie's abbreviation!) did have a Big compelling Reason to go back to the DoM, maybe even she was supposed to be in that office do do a Specific Deed and not solely for hiding purposes (I think she might have used that office as a hiding spot. Time-Travellers are not supposed to be seen, so maybe she was there, presumably hidden under a desk, knowing her, Harry and Neville's B5-selves would enter any minute now.) but she never did the Deed, because she was killed by Dolohov's curse. > Allie: (snipped) > SO: the theory ONLY works if Hermione from the future arrives and > then dies in the DoM, and the only reasons for her to do this is to > save Harry. lucianam: I don't agree that her only reason to go back in time would be to save Harry's life. I agree there must be a Important reason, but in the course of B7 we may learn, say, that it was VITAL that some 'small' thing happened or not during that night. Perhaps they were supposed to do something in the Prophecy Room, I don't know. Maybe switch the Prophecies? Remember there were two Prophecies Harry could touch, the 'die at the hand of the other' one and the other Trelawney made in PoA. Of course that would mean a Trio Time-Travel, Ron and Hermione coming along with Harry so they could watch his back. > SPOILER FOR THE SIXTH SENSE MOVIE > > > > > > > > > SPOILER FOR THE SIXTH SENSE MOVIE > > > > > > > > > SPOILER FOR THE SIXTHE SENSE MOVIE I know I related the `bookcase crash and heavy books cascade/ Hermione popping out of nowhere crying `Silencio!' to the `Willis being shot/Willis apparently alive apparition' in the very next scene. But this parallel works just as well with `Hermione being hit by the purple curse/Hermione happily reading the Daily Prophet' in The Second War Begins chapter. Sorry I didn't point that out earlier, I seem to take more than one post to put things together properly. Well, here we go: thanks to your (Allie's and Miles's) observations I got this whole thing clearer now, and as far as I can see a Hermione-from-the-past travelling to the DoM is a way more unlikely scenario than the other one (B7H travelling to the DoM). Keeping in mind we probably don't have enough clues to put this puzzle together, and the sad fact that I'm pants at Time-Travelling mechanics, I think I'll risk describing what is more likely to have happened. - Action begins in B7. For some reason (presumably Big) the Trio, or at least Ron and Hermione, decide to return to the DoM battle. They set up Ron's watch and off they go. - I'll suggest, as a somewhat random possiblity, B7 Ron and Hermione hid in the small office. Something happened, prompting the `shout, crash and scream'. In the few following minutes, B7 Hermione stays in the office as B5 Hermione, Harry and Neville run from the Death Eaters and finally get into the office. What happened to B7 Ron, did he leave the office, is he hiding too, is he hurt? - B5 Hermione is deluged by books. B7 Hermione cries `Silencio!' and strikes Dolohov dumb. Why? Perhaps she panicked the Death Eaters would come and reveal the existence of TWO Hermiones to Harry and Neville, or perhaps she pulled a Stag Patronus!Harry_ meaning she knows she can hex the Death eater because `that's what happened in the past so it must be allright'. Only it's not allright, of course, and even without the power of speech, Dolohov hits her with a curse strong enough to kill her. - Harry and Neville leave, carrying B7 Hermione, who is dead already (there was never a pulse!) or dies right before they reach the circular room and Harry notices the fiery crosses have faded. B5 Hermione remains unconscious, but alive, buried under the books. - Pure speculation: B7 Ron comes back to the office, or wakes up, and doesn't see Hermione. Or he was hiding all the time and had to witness everything that happened, and knows Harry and Neville took B7 Hermione with them. Does he find B5 Hermione under the books and tries to wake her up, as she remains unconscious? Does Dumbledore step right in and tells him he'll take care of her, tells him to go back to B7 Timeframe or tells him to finish whatever he was supposed to do in the DoM, in the first place? Does he realize all that by himself? - Probably before meeting Harry in his office, Dumbledore: hides, or buries, the body of B7 Hermione; obviously finds living! B5 Hermione under the books and heals any cuts and bruises she's suffered (Dolohov's curse supposedly didn't leave any marks); takes her to Madam Pomfrey and tells her Hermione was hit by a whatever-its-name purple curse, probably using the Confundus charm so Madam Pomfrey will buy that story and not give Hermione anything stronger than pumpkin juice `ten times a day'. B5 Hermione wakes up in the hospital wing and is told she was hit by the purple curse; possibly Harry tells her how it happened and if she doesn't remember crying `Silencio!', well, she's been through shock and all. Or Dumbledore messed with her memories, just a little. - Ron returns to B7 reality. He learns, immediately or afterwards, of Hermione's death. I expect Dumbledore's left directions to her burying place for him and Harry. Lucianam, wallowing in doubt but not that much (I'm pretty sure Hermione is dead, alas!) From ceridwennight at hotmail.com Sat Jan 28 14:16:40 2006 From: ceridwennight at hotmail.com (Ceridwen) Date: Sat, 28 Jan 2006 14:16:40 -0000 Subject: Plan for events on the Tower (was Re: Do any list members think Dumbledore might In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147176 bboyminn: > Then Dumbledore planned for McGonagall to send Flitwick to fetch > Snape, he planned for Snape to disable Flitwick. Then he planned for > Snape to rush to the top of the tower to kill him. *(snip)* > Again, I can see general contingency plans, I can see a setting of > priorities, but I simply can not see Dumbledore conspiring to that > end. Ceridwen: I do think there was a plan, but as you did, I tried to see how it would work. I didn't go back nearly as far as Montague. I thought it would have come about as a result of the DADA curse causing Snape to get brain-dead and take the UV so a lot of the so-called plan would have been, 'Then Draco does something, you keep an eye on him and tell me what he did...' What spoiled that scenario, where they actually need a lot of information to be filled in, was the way Dumbledore acted when Harry tried to tell him things about Draco. Dumbledore was more than cool, he was cold or outright off-putting. So he had to know something about what Draco was doing, because the other explanation, that he was as tired as Ron and Hermione of Harry always blaming Draco or Snape for what turns out to be no reason, just doesn't sound like Dumbledore. So, I too vote for a contingency plan, if you could call it a plan. I think they're trying to keep Harry out of it for once. Your quote above about Flitwick would fit perfectly well if Snape had been expecting *Harry* to arrive instead of Flitwick that night. He has been watching Draco, and reporting his movements to DD. Though neither he nor DD seem to know that Draco was getting DEs into Hogwarts, they do know he is planning on killing Dumbledore. So, DD takes Harry out of the castle, knowing he will need Snape when he returns - perfect excuse to send Harry to the dungeons and keep him out of the rest of Hogwarts while this is going on. Snape would, by agreement, stun Harry and rush off to either get Draco after the deed, or do it himself (which, for DDM!Snape who is going along with DD's plan, is a hateful thing, see his expression on the tower). The contingency was loose. Any detail, like Snape stunning Harry, was last-minute and tailored to the situation they believed would come about in a few hours. Dumbledore set it up well enough by insisting over and over that he needs Snape and not Madam Pomphrey. He even says once that Harry should 'wake' Snape. That would be the most detailed part of this emergency plot (hardly a plan!). Snape supposedly is sleeping, Harry wakes him, he 'reacts' by stunning Harry, and this is what Harry tells everyone afterwards. There are just some people that you don't wake suddenly: you get a punch in the jaw. By this scenario, Harry would not see Snape kill Dumbledore if that became necessary. Everyone would think it was Draco, or just not know what happened. Harry, by common agreement, would be kept out of it and Snape would tell LV that Draco did indeed successfully carry out LV's orders even if he did the killing, keeping Draco and his parents alive. In this scenario, the plan, such as it was, fell apart rapidly because of information they did not have: part of Draco's task was to get DEs into Hogwarts. This information from Rosmerta spurs DD onward from Hogsmeade, though at this point he is still expecting to be able to send Harry for Snape. He lands on the Astronomy Tower, the farthest point from the dungeons, making Harry's trip to get Snape much longer. Then another thing happens, Draco gets to the tower sooner than expected and Dumbledore has to freeze Harry in place, again, to keep him out of it. This also keeps Harry from taking part in the fight against the DEs. (Maybe there's a part of LV's plan we don't know? I'm still going over this whole scenario) Meanwhile, MM sends Flitwick to rouse Snape, not knowing that the first person there will be stunned. Dumbledore kept her in the dark as well - honest reactions play better than faked ones, and she will have to be seen as truly shocked and grieving. Snape stuns *Flitwick*, not Harry, and realizes something's gone horribly wrong. He goes to the tower and if any Legilimency occurs, it is either DD telling Snape that Harry is there, but to go ahead and do it anyway; or, it is DD telling Snape that he ingested the poison and the plan otherwise has failed. If no Legilimency took place, Snape is smart enough to see the two brooms and knows that Harry was with DD and was not in the dungeons nor fighting with the Order. 2+2=4 and Harry will be the sole non-DE witness. I think Dumbledore is the sort of person to make lemonade when life deals him lemons. The rest of the contingency, that of Snape killing Dumbledore, goes off. Dumbledore is satisfied, hence the expression on his corpse's face. If there is another part of the plan, we don't know about it. This includes the still-fresh blood coming from DD's mouth, speculation that he isn't really dead, the phoenix rising from the funeral pyre, and Snape's odd reactions when Harry chases him. So, that's my current take on what happened. They didn't know much, so they had two guidelines: Keep Harry out of it this year; Stop Draco from committing murder. They had a goal or goals aside from that, the obvious one would be to keep Snape in with the DEs. Beyond that, they were playing by ear and hoping that Draco would break down and give some useful information to Snape. The plan that night without complications: Dumbledore takes Harry to the cave where he ingests a Dark potion. He impresses Harry with the fact that only Snape can help. They return to Hogwarts, where Harry goes to the dungeons, wakes Snape and is stunned. Draco gets his chance to approach DD (maybe Harry following him was cramping his jr. DE style?), and Snape shows up to help. Dumbledore is found dead, ideally no one will know who did it. Snape will be the one to 'find' the body after he realizes he has stunned Harry, who was with Dumbledore earlier on. Draco and Snape are both covered, not only with the Order and the Ministry's DMLE, but with LV as well. It would only be a one-night plan, not something that has been brewing all year. It would attempt to take into account the info they have, that Draco is supposed to kill DD. It would also try to cover the two guidelines of keeping Harry out of it and stopping Draco from murdering. Not bad for the spur of the moment, but not very good at all given the lack of info and no planning for 'what- ifs' like DEs showing up or Draco arriving at the tower, or wherever, a bit too early. Ceridwen, who hates it when not-so-well-laid plans 'gang awry'. From stevejjen at earthlink.net Sat Jan 28 14:23:26 2006 From: stevejjen at earthlink.net (Jen Reese) Date: Sat, 28 Jan 2006 14:23:26 -0000 Subject: VA/H=Mx13+RP? (was: Was the eavesdropper unimportant to Harry?) In-Reply-To: <247.5f02f04.310c7645@aol.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147177 > Jen wrote: > JKR promised some fallout in book 7 due to an emotional mistake > by Dumbledore. > Julie: > I don't recall JKR saying this. Was it during an interview? Jen: That was my short-version interpretation of comments from the TLC/MN interview, not certain if everyone would intepret it that way? (More on how I got there after the quote.) ES: I know Dumbledore likes to see the good in people but he seems trusting almost to the point of recklessness sometimes. [Laughter] Yes, I would agree. I would agree. ES: How can someone so - JKR: Intelligent - ES: be so blind with regard to certain things? JKR: Well, there is information on that to come, in seven. But I would say that I think it has been demonstrated, particularly in books five and six that immense brainpower does not protect you from emotional mistakes and I think Dumbledore really exemplifies that. Jen again: I read that to mean there would be more in book 7 about Dumbledore 'trusting almost to the point of recklessnes' and that like in books 5 & 6, it would be a situation where his immense brainpower didn't protect him from an emotional mistake. Now if this meaning is correct, I was thinking over the possible situations not explained yet like Grindelwald, Godric's Hollow, or his trust of Snape. Or regarding trust of Snape, the emotional mistake might have been in trying to protect Snape and vouch for him *so* completely that Dumbledore ended up endangering the mission of a DDM!Snape, a Snape needing to work with a now mistrustful Harry and the Order. Jen, hoping that reads more clearly than it sounds to her ears this morning. From stevejjen at earthlink.net Sat Jan 28 14:47:30 2006 From: stevejjen at earthlink.net (Jen Reese) Date: Sat, 28 Jan 2006 14:47:30 -0000 Subject: Will there be an ESE!character in Book 7? (was:How to contstruct an ESE!plot...) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147178 Jen: > > Jen, on a kick of thinking things will be fairly straighforward in > the end and wondering how the series will read 5, 10, 20 years > from now when many of the mysteries are no more. > Betsy Hp: > I'm curious, how many people on this list think a character will > be revealed as ESE in book 7? I've always assumed that JKR will > throw in an all mighty twist and have someone that Harry trusted > turn out to be ESE. But, following this thread it seems like > most of you all (not Pippin, obviously ) think the masks have > all been removed and we know who's on what team. That book 7 will > consist of a scavenger hunt broken up by a melee or two and a > final showdown between Harry and Voldemort. (Oh, a bit on Snape.) > Am I right about this, or are there others still expecting a few > more twists? Jen: Hey wait, I got taken out of context there! My response was meant to be about mysteries already answered, that book 7 won't go back and re-answer things as ESE!Lupin would do in places, but continue to move forward to the biggies left for the end. I think the big mystery waiting to be revealed is not an ESE but Godric's Hollow. Maybe there will be a minor ESE, plus the twists of RAB and possibly other horcrux surprises. Finding out more about Sirius' death will answer something. The late-in-life magic and finally the answer about Harry's eyes. I can't imagine a JKR book without twists! Jen R., also impatient for another tome full of gasping surprises. From wrigs21 at yahoo.com Sat Jan 28 02:43:33 2006 From: wrigs21 at yahoo.com (Scott Ampe) Date: Fri, 27 Jan 2006 18:43:33 -0800 (PST) Subject: Merope's Selfishness In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20060128024333.6247.qmail@web33615.mail.mud.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 147180 Allie: >>I doubt that the entire character of Tom Riddle was due to his upbringing. Some of it was probably genetic. There's certainly enough evidence of "rotten to the core" in that family! He might have turned out just the same. << Wrigs21: I agree with what you are saying about Tom Riddle........I think he would have turned out "bad" anyways........Tom would have eventually figured out he was an Heir of Slytherin and that his father (a muggle) abandoned his pregnant wife........lets face it Merope did revert to using a potion to win the love of Riddle Sr......that is pretty rotten! Wrigs21 From wrigs21 at yahoo.com Sat Jan 28 02:34:58 2006 From: wrigs21 at yahoo.com (Scott Ampe) Date: Fri, 27 Jan 2006 18:34:58 -0800 (PST) Subject: A Sirius question....(haha) In-Reply-To: <8AEDBBAA-8FA3-11DA-B08E-000393B04DDE@alltel.net> Message-ID: <20060128023459.50034.qmail@web33609.mail.mud.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 147181 Kchuplis wrote: I was just thinking today of what a different Sirius we have in GoF from OoTP. Wrigs21 wrote: I do agree with you that Sirius's attitude changed a bit, but he was obviously depressed and annoyed........especially when Snape would report in to the order...I think Sirius was living vicariously through Harry...... Wrigs21 From sherriola at earthlink.net Sat Jan 28 17:24:34 2006 From: sherriola at earthlink.net (Sherry Gomes) Date: Sat, 28 Jan 2006 09:24:34 -0800 Subject: [HPforGrownups] re: Flight of the Prince In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <003a01c6242f$b6286000$0400a8c0@pensive> No: HPFGUIDX 147182 Allie: I desperately want to believe DDM!Snape, for the multitude of reasons voiced by other listees (how cliche for Snape to be the true villain after all, how could Dumbledore be so wrong about Snape), and after I read your post I have to say that I agree with you 100%. ESE!Snape, the Snape we think we know, would be gloating and holding over Harry's head what he had done. "I killed that fool of a headmaster, I murdered your hero" etc. Actually, this would also be the time for him to gloat about causing JAMES's death, if he wasn't remorseful about it. He doesn't know if he'll see Harry again, Harry thinks he knows that Snape murdered Dumbledore, Harry is going to atttack him any time he sees him in the future - if now is not the time to gloat about James (James dying, not James himself), then when? I'll be so disappointed if Snape is not Dumbledore's Man... because after all, "The World is not divided into good people and Death Eaters." Allie Sherry now: For me, the fact that Snape did not gloat was part of what made the scene so chillingly real and believable. I felt him triumphant, with no need to gloat anymore. Even if he is OFH, which is a theory I like, either way, I think his not gloating helped convince me that he had done the foul deed with no, please Severus kill me and get it over with, from Dumbledore. As for DDM Snape showing that the world is not made up of good guys and death eaters, i am convinced Draco will play that role for us. i desperately hope JKR will not be sending a message to children that it is ever ok to kill. That no so-called greater good is worth the killing of a good and strong person. i expect that even if Harry must kill Voldemort, he will not be happy with having to do that. the difference is that Voldemort is evil personified, and sometimes, you have to stamp out a plague to get rid of it. Soldiers and police officers are the only people off the hook for killing. if someone argues that as a soldier, Snape had to kill his general to protect the good side, i still don't buy it. i believe that whatever the truth ends up being, even if he is DDM, Snape will pay the price for his actions, because even if his motives are what some will consider brave and honorable, his world will never forgive him for it. i hope with all my heart that JKR is not going to send that message to kids, that killing can ever be justified or right. Sherry From sherriola at earthlink.net Sat Jan 28 17:30:13 2006 From: sherriola at earthlink.net (Sherry Gomes) Date: Sat, 28 Jan 2006 09:30:13 -0800 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: A Sirius question....(haha) In-Reply-To: <20060128023459.50034.qmail@web33609.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <003b01c62430$7fe03cb0$0400a8c0@pensive> No: HPFGUIDX 147183 Kchuplis wrote: I was just thinking today of what a different Sirius we have in GoF from OoTP. Sherry now: Here's my guess, for what it's worth. i agree that the Sirius we saw in OOTP was a very different person from the one we saw in the previous books. i do count POA, because I never believed he was out to kill Harry. That was such an obvious red herring. But in OOTP, he was quite different. i don't have my braille book handy, but I remember the brief passing mention of Harry reading in Herbology about some kind of plant that caused, was it confusion and rashness? i can't remember the exact phrasing, but I'm sure someone here can quote the text. that was just dropped into the text and never mentioned again. We've also been told by JKR, that if we will wait, we will find out something about the death of Sirius that is very important. i think that someone--take your pick, Kreacher, Snape, Lupin, molly--pick your favorite ESE character, may have been tampering with his food or drink and causing this reaction. Perhaps, I just don't want to believe Sirius changed so much, but he's truly poles apart from who he was in GOF, and there's got to be a very important reason for that. sherry From miles at martinbraeutigam.de Sat Jan 28 17:59:36 2006 From: miles at martinbraeutigam.de (Miles) Date: Sat, 28 Jan 2006 18:59:36 +0100 Subject: Flight of the Prince References: <003a01c6242f$b6286000$0400a8c0@pensive> Message-ID: <00fe01c62434$9adc5c70$14b2a8c0@rechnerchen> No: HPFGUIDX 147184 Sherry Gomes wrote: > Soldiers and police officers are the only people off the hook for > killing. > if someone argues that as a soldier, Snape had to kill his general to > protect the good side, i still don't buy it. i believe that whatever > the > truth ends up being, even if he is DDM, Snape will pay the price for > his > actions, because even if his motives are what some will consider > brave and > honorable, his world will never forgive him for it. Miles: The message up to now is that NO ONE has the right to kill except for self defence. For example, Moody is praised for always trying to arrest DEs, bringing them to Azkaban alive, whereas Crouch sr is blamed for letting the Dementors kiss DEs or for killing them in a different way without trial. Dumbledore, who is the main moral authority of the entire series, praises Harry for saving Peter's life. Dumbledore tells us, that any murder splits the soul of the murderer, and that this is the major damage that a human being can sustain. And there is no death penalty in the WW (Sirius is arrested for 13 murders - not executed) - Fudge's decision to let a Dementor kiss Sirius in PoA is condemned. Most of the list members on the DDM!Snape side (including me) have the impression that Snape will either die in book 7, or survive as a total outsider in the WW due to killing Dumbledore. Sherry Gomes wrote: > i hope with all > my > heart that JKR is not going to send that message to kids, that > killing can > ever be justified or right. Miles: I think your hope will come true, I don't think that JKR will change her message totally. This is one reason I'm very sure that Harry will not kill Voldemort - Voldemort will be dead in the end, and Harry will have done his part in this, but that is not the same thing. Miles, who does not expect a happy ending for Harry - if he survives, he will be kind of Frodo Potter From jlv230 at yahoo.co.uk Sat Jan 28 18:14:49 2006 From: jlv230 at yahoo.co.uk (jlv230) Date: Sat, 28 Jan 2006 18:14:49 -0000 Subject: The ancient and most noble house of Black Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147185 Did anyone see the partial view of the Black family tree drawn by JKR for a charity auction? It is very interesting - for example you can make out that a Son of Phineas Nigellus married Violetta Bulstrode, and their Daughter Dorea, born in 1920, married a Charlus Potter and they had one son (James?). I wonder why Harry never noticed... Another son of Nigellus married a Lysandra Yaxley, and their daughter Callidora married a Harfang Longbottom and they had one son and one daughter. Calliora is shown to be still alive so I thibk this must be Neville's Gran. It also shows several names have been burnt off. I hope we'll be able to see the full picture soon. It is amazing to see how closely connected the wizarding world is. JLV xx From mgrantwich at yahoo.com Sat Jan 28 18:20:50 2006 From: mgrantwich at yahoo.com (Magda Grantwich) Date: Sat, 28 Jan 2006 10:20:50 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Will there be an ESE!character in Book 7? (was:How to contstruct an ESE!plot In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20060128182050.85485.qmail@web53107.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 147186 >> Betsy Hp: >> I'm curious, how many people on this list think a character >> will be revealed as ESE in book 7? I've always assumed that >> JKR will throw in an all mighty twist and have someone that >> Harry trusted turn out to be ESE. > Lucianam: > > I'm partial to the ESE!Lupin theory, because not only it fits > in the Big Plot.... but also because Lupin's lines are often > dubious, or made seem so by some comment the author adds... > > I hate to think the Marauders were only created for the sake > of the Prank and as a "environment" for Snape, so that the > remaining Marauders were left to hang around like bothersome > psychos who are better off dead (not MY opinion) or kindly > professors who don't do a thing for three books in > a row. Yes, I assume that Harry will undergo a personal betrayal in Book 7, from someone close to him that he's trusted in the past. It would reinforce the fact that Voldemort is still capable of getting people on his side or to do his bidding voluntarily. Fake!Moody was someone Harry was growing to trust but although it was a huge shock Harry didn't have an emotional investment in him. This would have to be someone Harry considers a friend. I also agree with Lucianam that ESE!Lupin would be a real kick. I too find it bothersome that Lupin was so willing to whack Pettigrew in the Shrieking Shack in front of the Trio, and that he apparently lifted not one finger to find out how Harry was doing in Little Whinging all those years. Unlike Pippin, I don't see the necessity of inserting Lupin into every scene where something bad happens over the past six books. For me it would be enough for him to undergo a growing estrangement from James and Sirius after the Prank, to find himself in financial hardship after graduation, to feel a growing resentment of his friends' personal financial security and their inability to understand how difficult it was for him, to discover after POA that the situation had changed and that he was now the stronger Marauder and Sirius was dependent on him emotionally, and to feel increasing contempt for the WW which sees itself as so superior to other magical beings and yet is totally incompetent to protect itself. An ESE!Lupin finally letting the bitterness of decades well up and overpower him would be a major shock to Harry. Magda __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com From jlv230 at yahoo.co.uk Sat Jan 28 18:29:29 2006 From: jlv230 at yahoo.co.uk (jlv230) Date: Sat, 28 Jan 2006 18:29:29 -0000 Subject: The ancient and most noble house of Black In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147187 snip > Another son of Nigellus married a Lysandra Yaxley, and their > daughter Callidora married a Harfang Longbottom and they had one > son and one daughter. Calliora is shown to be still alive so I > think this must be Neville's Gran. JLV again: So very sorry to reply to my own post, but I checked the Lexicon and Neville's Gran is Augusta. Oops - I forgot we knew her name. "FAMILY Ancestry: Pure Blood. Mother: Alice Longbottom, former Auror, now at St. Mungo's Hospital for Magical Maladies and Injuries. Father: Frank Longbottom, former Auror, now at St. Mungo's Hospital for Magical Maladies and Injuries. Grandparents: Augusta Longbottom (but Neville calls his grandmother "Gran"). His Grandfather is deceased. Neville saw him die, but we don't know how this happened (OP21). Aunts, Uncles: Great uncle Algie, Great auntie Enid." Regards, JLV xx From trekkie at stofanet.dk Sat Jan 28 18:40:26 2006 From: trekkie at stofanet.dk (TrekkieGrrrl) Date: Sat, 28 Jan 2006 19:40:26 +0100 Subject: [HPforGrownups] The ancient and most noble house of Black References: Message-ID: <008a01c6243a$4e841560$080aa8c0@LHJ> No: HPFGUIDX 147188 > Did anyone see the partial view of the Black family tree drawn by JKR > for a charity auction? It is very interesting - for example you can > make out that a Son of Phineas Nigellus married Violetta Bulstrode, > and their Daughter Dorea, born in 1920, married a Charlus Potter and > they had one son (James?). I wonder why Harry never noticed... > > Another son of Nigellus married a Lysandra Yaxley, and their daughter > Callidora married a Harfang Longbottom and they had one son and one > daughter. Calliora is shown to be still alive so I thibk this must be > Neville's Gran. > > It also shows several names have been burnt off. > > I hope we'll be able to see the full picture soon. It is amazing to > see how closely connected the wizarding world is. > > JLV xx If anyone missed it, it's on Leakycauldron. And since that's slower than molasses at the moment, I've taken the liberty to uploading the pic on my own server. The biggest and best is here: http://trekkiegrrrl.dk/closeupblackfamtree.jpg ~Trekkie From lucianam73 at yahoo.com.br Sat Jan 28 18:52:37 2006 From: lucianam73 at yahoo.com.br (lucianam73) Date: Sat, 28 Jan 2006 18:52:37 -0000 Subject: The ancient and most noble house of Black In-Reply-To: <008a01c6243a$4e841560$080aa8c0@LHJ> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147189 TrekkieGrrrl wrote: > > > If anyone missed it, it's on Leakycauldron. And since that's slower than > molasses at the moment, I've taken the liberty to uploading the pic on my > own server. The biggest and best is here: > http://trekkiegrrrl.dk/closeupblackfamtree.jpg > > lucianam: Wow! Wow! That's great, I can read the names easily. Thanks a lot. Both Neville and Harry might have Black family blood in their veins, huh? That means either one could turn out to be a Metamorphamagus, like Tonks. lucianam From geebsy at yahoo.com Sat Jan 28 15:38:14 2006 From: geebsy at yahoo.com (geebsy) Date: Sat, 28 Jan 2006 15:38:14 -0000 Subject: Assuming they survive... -- careers In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147190 "susanmcgee48176": > What fun... > > I totally agree that Fred and George are natural businessmen, > will make a ton of money (even as Lord Voldemort is killing > people right and left), and will support his parents. (He has > already given Molly a lovely and expensive gift for Christmas). geebsy: No doubt Fred & George will continue with the business and generally cause mirth and mayhem in the WW. > Harry doesn't need the money, and is not the businessman type. > He will become head of the Auror office, and a famous Auror. > That's what he wants to be, and after Lord V is destroyed, there > will still be plenty of DEs to mop up... Ginny may also become > an Auror, she may have no taste for administration.... geebsy: There is no way Harry will officially become an Auror. Let's face it--he's been battling dark wizards since he was 11 (I don't count the AK backfire at age 1) I think he will take a few years off to enjoy married life, then become the conductor on the Hogworts Express. Ginny, after raising a few red-haired, green, blue, or brown eyed children will become the trolley lady. > Either Ginny or Hermione will become Minister of Magic... geebsy: Why would Hermoine want to work for the MoM? She sees how they treat Mr. Weasley, how Scrimgeour is not much better than Fudge (Remember Stan Shunpike!!!), how they sentenced Sirius to Azkaban without a trial! I think Hermione will find some other employment. I think she will set up a pro bono advice/law office to help underpriviledge witches, wizards and other magical entities who are caught in the cogs of injustice. Ron, after snogging his way through the 6 & 7 year girls will finally notice Hermione, help her with her practice. (After all, he did try to help Buckbeak & Hagrid), marry her and be a stay-at- home dad cooking wonderful meals while tending another BHWF. > Neville is clearly destined to be a Herbology professor at > Hogwarts, although it's possible he may die in Book 7. geebsy: Neville will come into his own and get a TV show re-vamping muggle gardens which will pay for his own investment into a magical botanical theme park with rides, games and a walking/talking Mimbletonia character which will go on to make millions for him. He will invest some of his money into: LUNAcy Quests, a tour group which features fabulous getaways in never before seen places where people can look for never before seen animals; run by you-guessed-it: Luna Lovegood. Roxane From jacques_poggio at yahoo.fr Sat Jan 28 17:25:43 2006 From: jacques_poggio at yahoo.fr (jacques_poggio) Date: Sat, 28 Jan 2006 17:25:43 -0000 Subject: From the future -- Re: Hermione dead and MAJOR SPOILER to "The Sixth Sense" movie In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147191 Hi there, I might be wrong, but I thought it was canon that nobody was coming from the future ? Or, at least, that all the characters were living in their "appropriate" time scale... But honestly, I might not be trustable in the canon. :) Jacques From jacques_poggio at yahoo.fr Sat Jan 28 17:33:20 2006 From: jacques_poggio at yahoo.fr (jacques_poggio) Date: Sat, 28 Jan 2006 17:33:20 -0000 Subject: Flight of the Prince In-Reply-To: <003a01c6242f$b6286000$0400a8c0@pensive> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147192 Rebecca/HunterGreen: >> He [Snape] doesn't even take the opportunity to hurt Harry a little bit. Sure, Voldemort didn't want Harry *killed*, but he would begrudge a little torture would he? Harry is actively ATTACKING Snape, if he threw a stupify or something at him, would it really matter? In fact, the only time Snape harms Harry (other than tossing him backward a few feet), is when Harry brings up Dumbledore. << Jacques: I wonder if the last scene between Snape and Harry, where Snape counters each curses Harry tries to cast, is not the his last lesson, showing him once again that it is definitely mandatory (!) for H. to improve his occlumency skills, to harden himself. (And maybe Harry's decision to drop his relationship with Ginny is his first act in this way.) From gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk Sat Jan 28 19:50:09 2006 From: gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk (Geoff Bannister) Date: Sat, 28 Jan 2006 19:50:09 -0000 Subject: Draco and Harry In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147193 First, a disclaimer. There have been many messages about Draco and Harry in the last few days, often under different thread titles. If I repeat ideas which have already been aired on the group, my apologies. First, one or two comments on recent posts. In message 147122, Gerry wrote: "So because Draco accidentally insulted Harry's mum he should be excused? The only accident here is Draco not verifying thoroughly enough that Harry was the right kind. Poor Draco, messed up his chance to be friends with Harry Potter because he accidentally let slip how much he despises people like Harry's mum." I shall say more about this point later in my message but I think it ought to be remembered that Draco does not have the monopoly of insulting parents. Harry had either insulted or been in a confrontation with Narcissa Malfoy on at least two occasions: `"You know your mother, Malfoy?" said Harry ? both he and Hermione had grabbed the back of Ron's robes to stop him launching himself at Malfoy ? "That expression she's got, like she's got dung under her nose? Has she always looked like that or was it just because you were with her?" Malfoy's pale face went slightly pink. "Don't you dare insult my mother, Potter?" "Keep your fat mouth shut then," said Harry, turning away.' (GOF "Mad-Eye Moody" p.180 UK edition) `Narcissa Malfoy strolled out from behind the clothes rack. "Put those away," she said coldly to Harry and Ron. "If you attack my son again, I shall ensure that it is the last thing you ever do." "Really?" said Harry, taking a step forward and gazing into the smoothly arrogant face that, for all its pallor, still resembled her sister's. He was as tall as she was now. "Going to get a few Death Eater pals to so us in, are you?" Malkin Malkin squealed and clutched at her heart. "Really, you shouldn't accuse ? dangerous thing to say ? wands away, please!" But Harry did not lower his wand. Narcissa Malfoy smiled unpleasantly. "I see that being Dumbledore's favourite has given you a false sense of security, Harry Potter. But Dumbledore won't always be there to protect you." Harry looked mockingly all round the shop. "Wow.. look at that... he's not here now! So why not have a go? They might be able to find you a double cell in Askaban with your loser of a husband!" Malfoy made an angry movement towards Harry but stumbled over his overlong robe. Ron laughed loudly. "Don't you speak to my mother like that, Potter!" Malfoy snarled.' (HBP "Draco's Detour" pp.110-11 UK edition) OK, I accept that Harry has been provoked but he has allowed himself to reply in kind and descend to the juvenile level of insult that Draco has used. Following on from that, in message 147151, RB wrote: "So yeah, while Draco undoubtedly has the foulest mouth in Hogwarts, is mean and ill-spirited, I just can't call him a 'bully' with a straight face. Judging from the fact that Draco keeps pestering the three people who'd given him hell time and again, I really doubt he goes after those who he knows are weaker than him (that's how Dudley works), I think he goes after those he really dislikes. Not saying that makes him an angel, of course :-D" I don't look on Draco as either a classical bully or foul-mouthed. It has been pointed out that Draco does not bully smaller students but confrontations are usually with guys in his own year. He does not indulge much in direct physical violence. This ties in with my second point, that he is not foul-mouthed. One of the strengths of JKR's writing which has caught my notice on many occasions is that she writes fiction which holds her readers without using bad language. One of the annoying things about the films (Shhhh, don't tell the elves I used that word!) is that Ron, in particular, is often free and easy with his language. No, Draco is not foul-mouthed. He has an acid tongue and can be bitingly sarcastic which will wind people up but I cannot recall stronger words from him. Gerry, in post 147171, comments: "Draco, who had six years of Hogwarts in when to know differently, did not change one bit. So I think it will take a huge amount of self-examination and courage for Draco to change. Now I do think Draco may change but it needs to be well written to be believable." This leads me on to the main thrust of my argument. Many group members seem to be dropping into a pattern of describing our two protagonists as Harry "best thing since sliced bread" Potter and Draco "puer horribilis" Malfoy. I have written posts on several occasions in which I have set out my own view that Harry is someone I can identify with strongly because he reminds me of myself when I was going through my teenage years and also my view that Draco is not beyond redemption yet, >From a real world point of view, it is sad that Draco and Harry got off on the wrong foot when they met for the second time on the train. They were very young and the impact the meeting had was to sour their relations and harden the hostility between them until at least the end of HBP. Obviously from the dramatic perspective of the story, it had to happen. I can recall when I about 10 or 11, confrontations in the school playground could sometimes lead to the sort of childish rudeness we see: "My dad's bigger than your dad so there!" "Well, your mum stinks so there." It was the language of children. As time goes on in the real world, guys in their mid to late teens will get involved in group altercations where boasting or threatening is part of the keeping face aspect of being a member of a group. But they are not one-sided; both sides will instigate this behaviour on occasions, Harry is usually fairly affable because Hogwarts to him is the only home he has really known. He has a group of friends around him who he first met there and who have grown up alongside him, but he can be rash and unthinking in his actions. His biggest example in this field is probably using the Sectumsempra spell on Malfoy. The spell was clearly marked "For enemies"; he doesn't know what effect it will produce neither does he know a counter-spell. And, again, his temper and !Capslock outbursts in OOTP seem to have become legendary among his peers. Draco on the other hand comes from a different direction but not necessarily a hugely happier one than Harry. From canon, I see that Narcissa, at least, is very fond of her son ? and probably loves him. On the other hand I get a feeling Lucius only fathered him in order to have an heir. He seems distant, hypercritical and dismissive of Draco. He is also a single child and I suspect has a lot of time on his own at home; I cannot see Crabbe and Goyle coming over to spend time with him. From an early age, he has been schooled in the fact that he is a pureblood and that his family are quite something in the Wizarding World. And, up to the age of about sixteen, he has had it presented to him that being a Death Eater and enjoying the patronage of Voldemort is a prize above everything. He likes to be seen to be moving in the top echelons of wizarding society, to be name dropping. Aren't we all like this? As an example, I have at home a photograph of myself at teacher training college standing within about a yard of Queen Elizabeth the Queen Mother. I used to take great pleasure in getting this out and passing it round to visitors. We all like to feel wanted and important. But, in HBP, we see the gilding beginning to come off the image. No longer can he imagine a world of leisure, money and power without strings. Initially we see him at the beginning of HBP full of the fact that he has been given a special job to do and relishing the awe being shown by his sycophantic gang. But as the book continues, we see him looking ill and drawn, crying in the bathroom and then racked with doubt as he apparently cannot bring himself to complete the task of killing Dumbledore. I believe that there is no one on our group who is either totally good or totally evil. We all lie somewhere in between; some of us lie more to one side than others. Draco starts out perhaps more to the evil end of the spectrum than Harry but I think of him as more malicious than evil. What he does has often been influenced and channelled by others round him. So I would agree with those who feel that there might be some sort of rapprochement between our two "friends";' probably not the back-slapping familiarity which we see between Ron and Harry but certainly a lessening of the acrimony and a move towards cooperation in order that both of them might keep themselves ? and indirectly the Wizarding World - intact. From kchuplis at alltel.net Sat Jan 28 20:35:32 2006 From: kchuplis at alltel.net (Karen Chuplis) Date: Sat, 28 Jan 2006 14:35:32 -0600 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: The ancient and most noble house of Black In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147194 On Saturday, January 28, 2006, at 12:52 PM, lucianam73 wrote: > lucianam: > > Wow! Wow! That's great, I can read the names easily. Thanks a lot. > > Both Neville and Harry might have Black family blood in their veins, > huh? That means either one could turn out to be a Metamorphamagus, > like Tonks. > Well, I would think you'd know that by now. But I do often wonder what will turn up. Just beginning to reread OoTP now and wondered what that was that made Vernon drop Harry when he was throttling him. It was like an electrical surge, and Harry definitely didn't DO it, well, not on purpose or knowingly. It was definitely an auto-defense mechanism. Is that related to the shield charm he had such difficulty with in GoF? kchuplis: who hopes to the literary Gods that Harry does not end up Frodo Potter. That is worse than Dead Harry IMO, since there are no white ships in WW. What lesson is there is that? Fight the good fight and be completely miserable for the rest of your life. Ugh. Made sense for Frodo, but egads, not Potter. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Sat Jan 28 20:49:06 2006 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Sat, 28 Jan 2006 20:49:06 -0000 Subject: Draco and Harry In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147195 Geoff: < HUGE SNIP> > This leads me on to the main thrust of my argument. Many group > members seem to be dropping into a pattern of describing our two > protagonists as Harry "best thing since sliced bread" Potter and > Draco "puer horribilis" Malfoy. Alla: Too funny, but I think I should clarify my position on this point. Do I think that Harry is a better person than Draco? Absolutely, I do. But the thing is, I don't really think that it takes a lot for any character to be a better person than Draco, SO if I say that Harry is a better person than Draco, it really does not make Harry A PERFECT person in my eyes, far from it. I mean, if I were to say that Harry is a person of better moral character than .... I don't know....Dumbledore, than yeah it would bring Harry close to sainthood. Right now, in my eyes, Harry is a good person, but has plenty of flaws. It is just in my book Draco's flaws are much WORSE than Harry's. That's all. MANY characters are in my book much, much better "people" than Draco. I would not dream of saying that they are perfect. It does not take a lot, IMO, to be a better person than Draco, really. As long as the character does not wish to torture and kill Muggleborns, they are better people than Draco. Geoff: So I would agree with those who feel > that there might be some sort of rapprochement between our > two "friends";' probably not the back-slapping familiarity which we > see between Ron and Harry but certainly a lessening of the acrimony > and a move towards cooperation in order that both of them might keep > themselves ? and indirectly the Wizarding World - intact. > Alla: Absolutely, after HBP I see it as a possibility, not a definite possibility, but a possibility nevertheless. What I do NOT see and I can be wrong of course is Draco and Harry becoming bestest friends as Betsy argued ( I think, sorry if I misunderstood). There is a HUGE difference IMO between tolerating each other for common goal and becoming friends. JMO, Alla From jlnbtr at yahoo.com Sat Jan 28 20:51:48 2006 From: jlnbtr at yahoo.com (Juli) Date: Sat, 28 Jan 2006 12:51:48 -0800 (PST) Subject: Black Family Tree *possible spoilers* Message-ID: <20060128205148.60543.qmail@web53113.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 147196 Just to be safe, SPOILERS!!! * * S * P * O * I * L * E * R * S Has anyone been on The Leaky Lounge Today? Well, there's a story about authors donating sheets of stuff, including our very own favorite, JKR. Jo's sheet is the Black Family Tree. It includes the Family crest and Motto (Toujours pur), a "There are many stories between the lines", and many names we've heard before, like: Potter, Longbottom, Burke, Bulstrode, and Crouch. The Potters (Dorea 1920-1977 & Charlus) had 1 son... maybe they're James' parents?, and James, having married a "mudblood" was erased... Check it out at http://www.the-leaky-cauldron.org/images/image.php?image=2006/01/closeupblackfamtree.jpg Juli Aol: jlnbtr Yahoo: jlnbtr --------------------------------- Yahoo! Autos. Looking for a sweet ride? Get pricing, reviews, & more on new and used cars. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From horridporrid03 at yahoo.com Sat Jan 28 21:35:59 2006 From: horridporrid03 at yahoo.com (horridporrid03) Date: Sat, 28 Jan 2006 21:35:59 -0000 Subject: Draco and Harry / Draco's Bigotry In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147197 > >>Betsy Hp: > > But what Draco has been taught is wrong. Only his ignorace > > keeps that belief going. Any competent muggleborn proves his > > parents' beliefs a lie. If Draco had had a personal reason to > > hate muggleborns (say Lily Evans killed his brother, or some > > such thing) than it'd be a harder belief to change. But since > > his belief is based on a fairly shaky foundation it will only > > take a minor amount of self-examination to destroy. > >>Gerry: > Well, as soon as he sets foot in Hogwarts he gets to know such a > muggleborn. And guess what: he absolutely hates her. > Betsy Hp: Does he? In the beginning I mean. Draco doesn't interact much at all with Hermione in PS/SS, that I can recall anyway. In fact, he doesn't pick out Hermione as an enemy until his father specifically tells him to *and* Hermione positions herself as his enemy. Once those two things happen, Draco certainly makes his dislike of Hermione clear. But, he doesn't dislike her *because* she's Muggleborn. > >>Gerry: > ... but I think a major factor in his hatred of Hermione is > that she -is- the opposite of what she according to his prejudice > should be. Betsy Hp: Hmm, that's an interesting idea. If true then Draco's willingness to get ideas from Hermione suggests that he's already moving away from his parents' beliefs, I think. > >>Gerry: > > The more empty a prejudice is, the harder it is to get rid of for > lots of people, because their sense of self will not let them see > themselves as the kind of person who is misled by something so > completely ridiculous they should have seen through it > immediately. Percy is an example of someone who refuses to go > through this on a personal scale. Draco, who had six years of > Hogwarts in when to know differently, did not change one bit. So I > think it will take a huge amount of self-examination and courage > for Draco to change. Betsy Hp: But those six years were spent in Slytherin House, sheltered away from anyone who'd challenge Draco's ideas (at least, as far as we've seen). And Draco is just entering the age when children start to reevaluate ideas they've been raised with. I'd also say that HBP, at the very least, has put Draco through much more than we've seen Percy go through. Draco has *already* seen that his parents (his *father*) made a mistake. Draco has learned that, despite what his father told him, Voldemort is dangerous and cruel and very bad for the Malfoy family. The self-examination has already started. And, as I pointed out above, Draco has already turned to a Muggleborn for inspiration. Draco's bigotry has never struck me as that strong. It's rote for him, and part and parcel with being a pure-blood, but he doesn't set out with his gang of thugs to beat up lone Muggleborn students. He's never refused to play quidditch because a Muggleborn is on the pitch. And when Draco *does* join with the equivilent of the Nazies or the Klan he's disenchanted with it pretty quickly (as Geoff points out). > >>Gerry: > Now I do think Draco may change but it needs to be well written to > be believable. Betsy Hp: Yes, and I think that not only can JKR write Draco's change well, she's foreshadowed his change from the beginning. As she's foreshadowed Harry and Draco becoming friends. (Not bestest friends, Alla. Just to clarify. ) Betsy Hp From gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk Sat Jan 28 21:44:22 2006 From: gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk (Geoff Bannister) Date: Sat, 28 Jan 2006 21:44:22 -0000 Subject: Black Family Tree *possible spoilers* In-Reply-To: <20060128205148.60543.qmail@web53113.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147198 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Juli wrote: > > Just to be safe, SPOILERS!!! > * > * > S > * > P > * > O > * > I > * > L > * > E > * > R > * > S Juli: > Has anyone been on The Leaky Lounge Today? Well, there's a story about authors donating sheets of stuff, including our very own favorite, JKR. > Check it out at http://www.the-leaky- cauldron.org/images/image.php?image=2006/01/closeupblackfamtree.jpg Geoff: Having just taken a look, I spotted a tip of the hat on JKR's part. The bottom RH corner has the name "Harfang Longbottom". Harfang is the name of the ruined city of the giants in C.S.Lewis' "The Silver Chair" and, for the first time (slaps head hard), I've realised that Longbottom, of course, is a name in LOTR; Tobold Longbottom was the first hobbit to plant tobacco in the Shire. From R.Vink2 at chello.nl Sat Jan 28 22:23:18 2006 From: R.Vink2 at chello.nl (Renee) Date: Sat, 28 Jan 2006 22:23:18 -0000 Subject: OT: Longbottom (Re: Black Family Tree *possible spoilers* In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147199 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Geoff Bannister" wrote: > > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Juli wrote: > > > > Just to be safe, SPOILERS!!! > > * > > * > > S > > * > > P > > * > > O > > * > > I > > * > > L > > * > > E > > * > > R > > * > > S > > Juli: > > Has anyone been on The Leaky Lounge Today? Well, there's a story > about authors donating sheets of stuff, including our very own > favorite, JKR. > > > > > Check it out at http://www.the-leaky- > cauldron.org/images/image.php?image=2006/01/closeupblackfamtree.jpg > > Geoff: > Having just taken a look, I spotted a tip of the hat on JKR's part. > > The bottom RH corner has the name "Harfang Longbottom". > > Harfang is the name of the ruined city of the giants in > C.S.Lewis' "The Silver Chair" and, for the first time (slaps head > hard), I've realised that Longbottom, of course, is a name in LOTR; > Tobold Longbottom was the first hobbit to plant tobacco in the Shire. > Renee: Eh... actually, his name was Tobold Hornblower; Longbottom was his place of residence, hence "Longbottom Leaf". From miles at martinbraeutigam.de Sat Jan 28 22:32:21 2006 From: miles at martinbraeutigam.de (Miles) Date: Sat, 28 Jan 2006 23:32:21 +0100 Subject: Draco and Harry References: Message-ID: <002601c6245a$b5203040$14b2a8c0@rechnerchen> No: HPFGUIDX 147200 Geoff Bannister wrote: > Draco on the other hand comes from a different direction but not > necessarily a hugely happier one than Harry. From canon, I see that > Narcissa, at least, is very fond of her son - and probably loves him. > On the other hand I get a feeling Lucius only fathered him in order > to have an heir. He seems distant, hypercritical and dismissive of > Draco. He is also a single child and I suspect has a lot of time on > his own at home; I cannot see Crabbe and Goyle coming over to spend > time with him. From an early age, he has been schooled in the fact > that he is a pureblood and that his family are quite something in the > Wizarding World. Miles: I strongly agree with your estimation of Draco as another "grey" character in the series - obviously a darker shade of grey than Harry and his friends, but still grey, not black. My impression of some listies who see Draco as "evil" is, that they more or less share Harry's PoV (which is parallel to the narrator's PoV), whereas others try to keep a distant and critical view of the narrator's evaluation - but we discussed this before to the point of disagreement (hi Alla :-) ). But I'd like to add another aspect to the comparison of Harry and Draco: the circles of friends. Harry's "inner circle" contains of two people, later three (Ginny). His friends are intelligent, independent, and the two/three of them act on an equal level, sometimes (but not always) with Harry as primus inter pares. Ron, Hermione and later Ginny are extremely loyal to Harry as he is loyal to them, but they criticise each other if they think it is necessary to do so. Harry has support, he has people who love him (sic), he can rely on them, they are friends, advisors and give him emotional comfort, and he can share (most of) his secrets with them. Draco's "inner circle" contains of Crabbe, Goyle, and Pansy. (Do I have to continue?). We do not know very much about their relations, but we get some impressions. The deepest insight is in CoS with Harry and Ron as Crabbe and Goyle in the Slytherin Common Room. AFAIR the young Malfoy/Crabbe/Goyle mirror the relation of their fathers - the sons of C&G are more or less "ordered" to "serve" Draco, as their fathers serve Lucius (I'm not sure about canon, maybe my interpretation is too ambitious here). But what we know, C&G are stupid, they act as bodyguards to Draco, but they are certainly far away from being on equal terms with Draco or being his advisors. Pansy, joining Draco later as his girlfriend, seems to admire him, again a relation with clear hierarchy. Draco lacks friends who support him emotionally, criticise him, and he has nobody whom he can share his secrets with - we clearly see this in HBP (Myrtle). Yes, Draco is partly responsible for his own friends, as Harry is for his friends. But he is pushed by his family background into a social situation he obviously suffers from at the latest in HBP. And how could he escape from this situation as long as he is at Hogwarts? We should think about our own schooltime - a change of school always changes the social relations of a student, and sometimes such a change is the only chance to get out of a desperate situation with "bad" friends (or an isolated situation without any friends). As a Hogwarts student Draco's chances of finding *real* friends is very small - but it can improve now (not if he joins the DE "community"...). Miles From gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk Sat Jan 28 22:59:02 2006 From: gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk (Geoff Bannister) Date: Sat, 28 Jan 2006 22:59:02 -0000 Subject: OT: Longbottom (Re: Black Family Tree *possible spoilers* In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147201 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Renee" wrote: > > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Geoff Bannister" > wrote: > > Geoff: > > Tobold Longbottom was the first hobbit to plant tobacco in the Shire. > > > > Renee: > Eh... actually, his name was Tobold Hornblower; Longbottom was his > place of residence, hence "Longbottom Leaf". > Geoff: Of course he was. I couldn't locate the reference in my LOTR tonight. From mrsewp at earthlink.net Sat Jan 28 23:34:23 2006 From: mrsewp at earthlink.net (Elizabeth Catherine) Date: Sat, 28 Jan 2006 23:34:23 -0000 Subject: OT: Longbottom (Re: Black Family Tree *possible spoilers* In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147202 > > > Just to be safe, SPOILERS!!! > > > * > > > * > > > S > > > * > > > P > > > * > > > O > > > * > > > I > > > * > > > L > > > * > > > E > > > * > > > R > > > * > > > S > > > > Juli: > > > Has anyone been on The Leaky Lounge Today? Well, there's a story > > about authors donating sheets of stuff, including our very own > > favorite, JKR. > > > > > > > > > Check it out at http://www.the-leaky- > > cauldron.org/images/image.php? image=2006/01/closeupblackfamtree.jpg > > seriously snipped... Not only is a Longbottom on the Black Family Tree but a Charlus Potter... is this the true reason why Harry was so easily able to inherit #12 Grimmauld Place? Sirius, though clever, might not have been able to get past his father's spellwork. Note in addition that there is no date of death for said Potter, only his wife... and they had one son... James?? Did Harry et al really study the map or did he get sidetracked with the Draco revelation? Why would Tonks and Sirius not mention this connection, if it is true? I peeked at the map when I was trolling on Muggle Net because I'm feeling the need for sirius company... Liz From whtwitch91 at yahoo.com Sat Jan 28 22:23:14 2006 From: whtwitch91 at yahoo.com (whtwitch91) Date: Sat, 28 Jan 2006 22:23:14 -0000 Subject: Flight of the Prince Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147203 This whole scene has always had bits that bother me, and I think that DD could hav made up a plan to die on the tower. Take Draco and his DE buddies out of the mix. DD comes back from the cave having drunk something that amounts to cursed antifreeze. He has scoped out this situation earlier (remember those unexplained trips?) and is certain that it is a deadly poisen, and to drink it is to die. (Regulus Black arrived at that same cave earlier and died mysteriously later, I've always suspected from that poisen.) DD tells Harry to get Snape, not Madame Pomfrey, but Snape. Perhaps the scenario for Snape tokill DD is set to go that night. Then Draco arrives and DD improvises. He has Harry hidden under the invisibility cloak, and then he immobilizes him! Why do you immobilize your best fighter in a time of crisis? Earlier he said "I always feel safe with you, Harry." That little plot twist has always seemed strange to me. Isn't this a little clue from Jo that we are being slipped a mickey? There is only one solution short of carelss writing by Jo, and I dismiss that. Because it's all set up. Snape was supposed to kill DD on the tower. And Harry was supposed to see it or know it irrefutably. I have been rereading all the books one after the other and by reading them in such a compressed manner one thing stands out. Snape has deliberately antagonized Harry, probably with DD's permission. He wants Harry to absolutely hate him. And as for why, only one thing occurs to me now for a reason for that. At some point in time Harry has to hate Snape enough to point his wand at him and utter Avada Kadavra and mean it. Don't ask me why. Sue From miles at martinbraeutigam.de Sun Jan 29 00:05:20 2006 From: miles at martinbraeutigam.de (Miles) Date: Sun, 29 Jan 2006 01:05:20 +0100 Subject: Black Family Tree *possible spoilers* References: Message-ID: <003801c62467$b425ded0$14b2a8c0@rechnerchen> No: HPFGUIDX 147204 Elizabeth Catherine wrote: > Not only is a Longbottom on the Black Family Tree but a Charlus > Potter... is this the true reason why Harry was so easily able to > inherit #12 Grimmauld Place? Sirius, though clever, might not have > been able to get past his father's spellwork. Note in addition that > there is no date of death for said Potter, only his wife... and they > had one son... James?? Did Harry et al really study the map or did > he get sidetracked with the Draco revelation? Why would Tonks and > Sirius not mention this connection, if it is true? Miles: But Sirius told us (in OotP) that all pureblood families are interrelated. So Harry is a distant "cousin" of Ron, Draco and Harry are distant relatives, Sirius is kind of an "uncle" for Harry... I do not see the new details of the Black family tree as a surprise, and I doubt they will be important. James Potter was a descendant of an ancient family of the WW, so according to Sirius' statement he is somehow related to all/most non-muggleborn wizards. Where's the news? Miles From lucianam73 at yahoo.com.br Sun Jan 29 00:24:57 2006 From: lucianam73 at yahoo.com.br (lucianam73) Date: Sun, 29 Jan 2006 00:24:57 -0000 Subject: From the future -- Re: Hermione dead and MAJOR SPOILER to "The Sixth Sense" mov In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147205 > jacques_poggio wrote: > > Hi there, > > I might be wrong, but I thought it was canon that nobody was coming > from the future ? Or, at least, that all the characters were living > in their "appropriate" time scale... > > But honestly, I might not be trustable in the canon. :) > > Jacques > lucianam: I think I read something about nobody coming from the future, also. Only in this case the Trio (or at least Hermione) would be Time-Travelling to the past (into Book 5). So I suppose it doesn't disagree with canon. Lucianam From mrsewp at earthlink.net Sun Jan 29 00:28:33 2006 From: mrsewp at earthlink.net (Elizabeth Catherine) Date: Sun, 29 Jan 2006 00:28:33 -0000 Subject: Black Family Tree *possible spoilers* In-Reply-To: <003801c62467$b425ded0$14b2a8c0@rechnerchen> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147206 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Miles" wrote: > Miles: > But Sirius told us (in OotP) that all pureblood families are interrelated. > So Harry is a distant "cousin" of Ron, Draco and Harry are distant > relatives, Sirius is kind of an "uncle" for Harry... > I do not see the new details of the Black family tree as a surprise, and I > doubt they will be important. James Potter was a descendant of an ancient > family of the WW, so according to Sirius' statement he is somehow related to > all/most non-muggleborn wizards. Where's the news? > > Miles > Now Me: Thanks for responding to my post: Well, for me the "news" is perhaps some proof of a live member of Harry's family, that for whatever reason, could not take the baby Harry, resulting in his placement at the Dursley's home. Charlus does not have a date of death on this teaser tree, so where is he? I also just enjoy getting more of the backstory/info, as we have months of speculation ahead before Book 7. As to it not being important, possibly not, since JK must clearly realize how this teaser tree would set the electronic community into a flurry of speculation of possible clues and revelations. Why leak anything truly important? Happy to make JK's realizations come true while really wanting to get a good look at the complete tree for The Most Noble and Ancient House of Black, Liz/ Elizabeth Catherine From miles at martinbraeutigam.de Sun Jan 29 00:41:07 2006 From: miles at martinbraeutigam.de (Miles) Date: Sun, 29 Jan 2006 01:41:07 +0100 Subject: Black Family Tree *possible spoilers* References: Message-ID: <005701c6246c$b1f291d0$14b2a8c0@rechnerchen> No: HPFGUIDX 147207 Elizabeth Catherine wrote: > Well, for me the "news" is perhaps some proof of a live member of > Harry's family, that for whatever reason, could not take the baby > Harry, resulting in his placement at the Dursley's home. Miles: The answer to this IMO is quite simple: To activate the ancient magic that protects Harry until his 17th birthday he needs to be "at home" in a house that is owned by a blood-relative of his MOTHER. It was Lily's sacrifice that protected Harry, and Lily is muggleborn. So the safe place for Harry could not be a wizard's family, because Harry's magical relatives are all from his father's side. Miles From Nanagose at aol.com Sun Jan 29 00:55:02 2006 From: Nanagose at aol.com (spotsgal) Date: Sun, 29 Jan 2006 00:55:02 -0000 Subject: Black Family Tree *possible spoilers* In-Reply-To: <003801c62467$b425ded0$14b2a8c0@rechnerchen> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147208 > Miles: > But Sirius told us (in OotP) that all pureblood families are > interrelated. Christina: And Hagrid told us in PS/SS that, "There's not a single witch or wizard who went bad who wasn't in Slytherin." Exaggeration. I always figured that most of the pureblood families were related at some point, but *every single one*? I'm a bit surprised. > Miles: > So Harry is a distant "cousin" of Ron, Draco and Harry are distant > relatives, Sirius is kind of an "uncle" for Harry... > I do not see the new details of the Black family tree as a surprise, > and I doubt they will be important. James Potter was a descendant of > an ancient family of the WW, so according to Sirius' statement he is > somehow related to all/most non-muggleborn wizards. Where's the > news? Christina: Well, as unobservant as Harry usually is, I would still think that he would have noticed the name "Potter" on Sirius's family tree, if not "Crouch" and "Longbottom" as well. Sirius points out several names, but he doesn't point out Harry's grandparents? And Harry completely misses seeing the name? Eh. He certainly notices Draco's name, and "Lestrange" as well. The "Aunt Elladora" that Sirius points out is directly above the Potters' names - Harry was essentially staring right at it. And for all of Harry's angst about how his family is dead, I would also have thought that Sirius would have mentioned something like, "See, Harry? My blah-blah cousin was sisters with your grandmother, so you do have a family, a real blood family - me." Also, the way Sirius talks about Mr. and Mrs. Potter doesn't seem like the way somebody would talk about people they were related to. If certain little parts of the tapestry scene in OP were different, I wouldn't be surprised by JKR's notes on the tree. But the the fact that James and Sirius seem to be pretty closely related, combined with the weirdness of the dates...that's news. It doesn't match up with what we thought we knew. Maybe JKR meant all along for 40 to be a bit old for having kids, but keeping in mind the lifespans of wizards, I never expected that. If Charlus and Dorea really are James's parents (which I am still not convinced that they are - the dates are kind of wonky), then James and Sirius could have been *very* closely related. James and Sirius could have been as close as first cousins. I don't see anything *wrong* with that, but I personally dislike it. The power of the bond between James and Sirius lies in the fact that they were as close as brothers even though no blood (supposedly) connected them. JKR has continually demonstrated that the bonds of friendship can be just as strong (and in many cases, stronger) than the bonds of blood. If James and Sirius were blood-related, it weakens the meaning their relationship has, for me. If the Potters were related to Sirius, it also lessens the meaning (for me) in taking him in as a "second son." Ditto for Harry and the Weasleys. The gift of family that the Weasleys give to Harry is meaningful because they *aren't* his family (well, now they might be, but you know what I mean). Those are just my personal feelings, of course. One more thing that's really bothering me - if Dorea and Charlus were James's parents, wouldn't they be blasted off the tapestry for taking in blood-traitor!Sirius and treating him as a son? I'm convinced that this is a page of JKR's early "notes," and not a replica of the tapestry Harry saw at 12GP. The entire HP story underwent so many changes before it arrived where it is (didn't one version have Hermione's dad finding the Potters' dead bodies?) - I think it's possible that the Black family tree was tweaked as well. That would explain that, even if the Potters *are* related to the Blacks, they might not be on the 12GP tapestry (blasted off perhaps, or more distantly related than we see them here) and so Harry wouldn't have seen them. JKR might have also changed the dates of James's parents' birth since writing out the auctioned tree to make them older when they died, etc. Christina From luckdragon64 at yahoo.ca Sun Jan 29 01:20:28 2006 From: luckdragon64 at yahoo.ca (Bee Chase) Date: Sat, 28 Jan 2006 20:20:28 -0500 (EST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] The ancient and most noble house of Black In-Reply-To: <008a01c6243a$4e841560$080aa8c0@LHJ> Message-ID: <20060129012028.32486.qmail@web53315.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 147209 TrekkieGrrrl wrote: > Did anyone see the partial view of the Black family tree drawn by JKR > for a charity auction? It is very interesting - for example you can > make out that a Son of Phineas Nigellus married Violetta Bulstrode, > and their Daughter Dorea, born in 1920, married a Charlus Potter and > they had one son (James?). I wonder why Harry never noticed... Luckdragon: I like what's written under the title. Something about there being many stories between the lines. This is the way I've felt about the entire series. There are many clues if you "read between the lines". --------------------------------- Find your next car at Yahoo! Canada Autos [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From rlai1977 at yahoo.com Sun Jan 29 02:13:49 2006 From: rlai1977 at yahoo.com (rlai1977) Date: Sun, 29 Jan 2006 02:13:49 -0000 Subject: Draco and Harry In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147210 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Geoff Bannister" wrote: Snip snip! > I don't look on Draco as either a classical bully or foul-mouthed. It > has been pointed out that Draco does not bully smaller students but > confrontations are usually with guys in his own year. He does not > indulge much in direct physical violence. This ties in with my second > point, that he is not foul-mouthed. One of the strengths of JKR's > writing which has caught my notice on many occasions is that she > writes fiction which holds her readers without using bad language. > One of the annoying things about the films (Shhhh, don't tell the > elves I used that word!) is that Ron, in particular, is often free > and easy with his language. No, Draco is not foul-mouthed. He has an > acid tongue and can be bitingly sarcastic which will wind people up > but I cannot recall stronger words from him. Oh, I do consider the 'M' word foul language, but otherwise I agree with you :-) > This leads me on to the main thrust of my argument. Many group > members seem to be dropping into a pattern of describing our two > protagonists as Harry "best thing since sliced bread" Potter and > Draco "puer horribilis" Malfoy. I haven't seen funnier middle names for either boy *bg* > So I would agree with those who feel > that there might be some sort of rapprochement between our > two "friends";' probably not the back-slapping familiarity which we > see between Ron and Harry but certainly a lessening of the acrimony > and a move towards cooperation in order that both of them might keep > themselves ? and indirectly the Wizarding World - intact. Draco has since the beginning of the series been portrayed as Harry's 'opposite number' (Rowling's own words). Post-HBP it has become quite possible to me what she meant wasn't that Draco's personal qualities were direct opposite of Harry's, but that they started off the opposite ends of the spectrum that is this war- Harry by default the ultimate anti-Voldemort of his age, while Draco by default the ultimate pro-Voldemort among his peers. But I think they are both moving away from the pole their "birthright" had placed them, what with Harry feeling sympathy for the boy who would later become Voldemort, and Draco beginning to question if he wanted to follow the Dark Lord's orders. So I wouldn't be too surprised that these two boys meet each other in some sort of middle ground in the last book of the series, it would be quite a satisfying moment for me when/if that happens too :-) RP From foxmoth at qnet.com Sun Jan 29 02:34:12 2006 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Sun, 29 Jan 2006 02:34:12 -0000 Subject: VA/H=Mx13+RP? Snape's Culpability? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147211 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "dumbledore11214" wrote: > > > Magpie: > > > I mean, from his pov think of it this way. He's on Voldemort's > > > side. His goal is to support him. So > > > think of if Snape was working for DD and he heard a prophecy that > > > said that someone who would destroy him could be found in such > and > > > such a place. He'd naturally pass that information on as a > > > supporter of DD. > > > > Jen: There's a small problem with the comparison because Snape is > > working toward an evil end. The actions are the same, the ends are > > not. Culpability-wise, I mean. > > Alla: > > Jen, thank you. Of course for DE Snape it would be a natural impulse > to pass the information to Voldemort. I am just not getting how it > makes him less culpable. Yes, he did passed the Prophecy to his > boss, but the boss is the bad guy, REALLY bad guy, so if the > argument is something along the lines that Snape did not know that > the murderous evil maniac will act upon the information that the > child would be born who can defeat him, as murderous evil maniac > would act? I just don't see at all how Snape could not have known > that. I am NOT buying stupid Snape and I am also not sure how > Carol's argument fits into the picture at all. Pippin: I think something important is getting lost here. VWI was a very dirty war. *Both* sides were using Unforgivable Curses. Yes, the Ministry's policy was only to use them on suspects, but they're not exactly particular about who they suspect. Snape the DE spy knew if he was caught, or even suspected, he might be killed out of hand or tortured for information. He would know innocent people, only suspected of being DE's, who had been condemned, just as Harry does. Voldemort's cause was no doubt more evil, but it would have been hard to tell with both sides committing atrocities. DDM!Snape fan though I am, I don't think DE Snape was unaware that enemies of the Dark Lord, "those who have thrice defied him" were going to be killed. Of course they would, that's what happens in war. If they don't want to be killed, let them stop being enemies. According to Dumbledore, something changed when Snape discovered that the enemies Voldemort was going to attack as a result of his information were people that he knew. Dumbledore says he himself didn't care very much if "numbers of nameless and faceless people and creatures were slaughtered in the vague future, if in the here and now" someone he knew was "alive, well and happy." But Peter (and anyone else who was involved in giving up the Secret) knew James and Lily, and were considered their friends. That was not an act of war. It was personal. Pippin From kchuplis at alltel.net Sun Jan 29 02:42:37 2006 From: kchuplis at alltel.net (Karen Chuplis) Date: Sat, 28 Jan 2006 20:42:37 -0600 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: VA/H=Mx13+RP? Snape's Culpability? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147213 On Saturday, January 28, 2006, at 08:34 PM, pippin_999 wrote: > According to Dumbledore, something changed > when Snape discovered that the enemies Voldemort was going to > attack as a result of his information were people that he knew. > Oo. Where is this? I just don't remember it. It always seems like everything said in the books about Snape and that time is so vague. Thanks! kchuplis [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From foxmoth at qnet.com Sun Jan 29 02:52:58 2006 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Sun, 29 Jan 2006 02:52:58 -0000 Subject: VA/H=Mx13+RP? Snape's Culpability? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147214 Pippin: > > According to Dumbledore, something changed > > when Snape discovered that the enemies Voldemort was going to > > attack as a result of his information were people that he knew. > > kchuplis: > Oo. Where is this? I just don't remember it. It always seems like > everything said in the books about Snape and that time is so vague. > Thanks! Pippin: HBP ch25 p549 US "But he did not know--he had no possible way of knowing --which boy Voldemort would hunt from then onward, or that the parents he would destroy in his muderous quest were people that Professor Snape knew, that they were your mother and father--" ... "You have no idea of the remorse Professor Snape felt when he realized how Lord Voldemort had interpreted the prophecy, Harry. I believe it to be the greatest regret of his life and the reason that he returned--" --- Harry interprets this as Snape returning after his parents were dead, but we know from the Pensieve trial in GoF and Snape's conversation with Bella that he was working with Dumbledore before Godric's Hollow. Pippin From nkafkafi at yahoo.com Sun Jan 29 03:16:28 2006 From: nkafkafi at yahoo.com (nkafkafi) Date: Sun, 29 Jan 2006 03:16:28 -0000 Subject: Order of Siblings (was: The ancient and most noble house of Black) In-Reply-To: <008a01c6243a$4e841560$080aa8c0@LHJ> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147215 > > If anyone missed it, it's on Leakycauldron. And since that's slower than > molasses at the moment, I've taken the liberty to uploading the pic on my > own server. The biggest and best is here: > http://trekkiegrrrl.dk/closeupblackfamtree.jpg > > ~Trekkie > Thanks Trekkie! Here`s what bothering me: Phineas is Elladora's older brother (he was born in 1847 and she in 1850) and he's on her left ? well and good. Callidora is older than her sister Charis (1915 vs. 1919) and she's on her left ? well and good. But what about Belvina? She's on the left of her brother Arcturus, but is she older than him? Her birth date isn't very clear in the picture, but it looks to me like 1886, which would make her *younger* than Arcturus (1884). The reason I'm asking is that: About two years ago I hypothesized that the three Black cousins were born in the order Bellatrix, Andromeda, Narcissa, because according to the description of the tree in OotP they appear from left to right in that order. In HBP it was indeed verified that Bella is the eldest. If we established now that JKR adheres to the common rule of listing siblings from left to right according to their age it would be practically established that Andromeda is indeed the second sister and Narcissa the youngest. However, Belvina's birth date foils this nice consistency a bit. Can anybody please convince me it's not 1886? I offer a free bag of ACID POPS as a prize. Neri From nkafkafi at yahoo.com Sun Jan 29 03:24:52 2006 From: nkafkafi at yahoo.com (nkafkafi) Date: Sun, 29 Jan 2006 03:24:52 -0000 Subject: ESE!Lupin condensed and Lupin and Sirius replies In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147216 > Pippin: > But you take it for granted that JKR isn't going to spring a > big "unofficial" mystery on us again, and I don't. Because the > first thing she'd have to do, if she wanted to fool us *again*, > is convince us that there's nothing up her sleeve. It's been > a straightforward fantasy adventure/bildungsroman from OOP > on. Right. And I'm the Easter Bunny.:-) > Neri: Oh, I'm sure some unofficial mysteries will also be solved in Book 7, but right now JKR's sleeves are full to the cuffs with huge official mysteries that *must* be solved, and I'd say they are her first priority. > Pippin: > OOP has the "official" mystery of who hexed Podmore, with > no "official" solution, just Hermione's guess that Lucius might > have done it. Neri: Actually the Sturgis Podmore mystery was officially closed: ************************************** OotP, Ch. 25, p. 787 (Scholastic): 'So, he's got you doing his dirty work for him, has he?' said Harry. 'Like he tried to get Sturgis to steal it ? and Bode?' 'Very good, Potter, very good . . .' said Malfoy slowly. 'But the Dark Lord knows you are not unintell? 'NOW!' yelled Harry. ************************************* BTW, I find it instructive that Malfoy's confession here is interrupted by the chase. It illustrates JKR's critical problem with the merging of the mystery genre and the adventure genre. In the adventure genre you can't stop the pace of the plot all the time for lengthy explanations and confessions. This is why JKR sometimes close a mystery in a hurried way that perhaps won't satisfy you. Or sometimes not at all, like in "how Harry got back the Marauders' Map in OotP". The answer IIRC was something like "Oh, I thought you got that by yourselves. Must I spell out *everything*? It would have ruined the mourning atmosphere to explain it in the end of GoF". > > Neri: > Incomplete yes, but I can't remember an official solution that was > later turned 180 degrees. > > Pippin: > You mean besides Snape being responsible for the hexing, or > Sirius being a traitor? We had no reason to doubt either of > those when they were first put to us. > Neri: I'll formulate what I meant more precisely. I can't remember a case of an official mystery that was officially closed, and then opened and turned 180 degrees. Snape doing the hexing and Sirius being the traitor weren't solutions to previous mysteries. They were answers that were presented at the same time with the questions. > Neri: > > Regarding Snape knowing the Marauders' nicknames, I'm personally sure > he knows it from the pensieve. He didn't hear it the first time > around, of course, but he probably visited this memory again, and I'm > sure he wouldn't resist a chance to spy on the Marauders, even 20 > years after the fact. If Harry could hear the Marauders' conversation > in the pensieve, then so could Snape. In fact, I always thought that > the pensieve scene was written, in a small part, to answer the > question of where Snape had learned the Marauders' nicknames. > > Pippin: > But Snape acts like he doesn't know for sure that the > map is connected with the Marauders,and he *would* know if > he'd had access to a pensieve at that time. He'd have > known about running around with a werewolf every month > too. > Neri: Or he acts like he knows but can't prove it ? unless he exposes his worst memory. Not something he'd like to do. Of course he'd know the Marauders ran with a werewolf, but that's hardly more than he already knows or suspects. However, I find it significant that JKR took care not to mention the animagi part in the pensieve memory at all. In fact, she made Remus stop Sirius just in time before he let it out. It must not be mentioned because in PoA Snape doesn't yet know about it. > Pippin: > So I'd say the question of > how Wormtail could have done all that stuff is more open than > ever. Snape certainly shows a dangerous contempt for a wizard who's > supposed to have killed twelve people with a wand held behind his > back, even if they were Muggles, a wizard he must know has > successfully lied to Voldemort, if your theory is correct. Or doesn't > Snape know about the life debt either? > Neri: Snape also shows contempt for Lupin, even in front of school kids rather than pureblood DEs. And I doubt Snape knows about Wormtail's Life Debt. There's no reason he'd know unless Dumbledore told him, and Dumbledore wasn't a very informative person, you know. We already know for sure he kept the second part of the prophecy a secret from Snape, and it seems this wasn't the only thing. We don't have much reason to think he let Snape know about the Horcrux hunt either. > Neri: > > I'd say the question "Who killed the unicorns in SS/PS?" is an > officially solved mystery. Quirrellmort killed them. > > Pippin: > How can it be officially solved when Quirrell never confessed > to killing them? > > I'm not sure we agree on what an "official" solution is. I'd > say it's one where the culprit confesses and is removed from > any possibility of recanting. The confessions of Lockhart, > Quirrell and Barty Jr are final, IMO. Neri: This is semantics. If you insist we can have Official Solutions of the First Degree, Second Degree and so on. But the basic problem here isn't semantic, it's a very real and practical problem. JKR can only solve a limited number of mysteries in Book 7, especially if she wants to do them justice. You multiply mysteries at a staggering rate, and you refuse to close existing mysteries without a full confession, and sometimes not even then (since you don't accept Wormtail's confession). You have JKR herself supplying the official solution that Wormtail killed Cedric, and you open it again. So you inevitably end up with a huge number of mysteries to be solved in Book 7. > Pippin: > I'm saying Voldemort knows about Wormtail's debt, but discounts > its significance as the kind of "ancient magic of which he knows, > which he despises, and which he has always, therefore, underestimated > -- to his cost" OOP ch 37. Neri: That doesn't seem to fit with Dumbledore's words that "I'm much mistaken if Voldemort wants his servant to be in the debt of Harry Potter". I know Dumbledore was sometimes mistaken, but I think in this case he was right on the money. > Neri: > I think Lupin's forgetfulness is easily explained by the DADA jinx. > > Pippin: > I don't think so. It seems to work like > the opposite of felix felicis, causing people to make foolish > decisions confidently. It was foolish of Quirrellmort to > touch Harry, foolish of Lockhart to try to obliviate someone > with a broken wand, foolish of Fake!Moody to try to kill > Harry under Dumbledore's nose, and foolish of Umbridge > to insult the centaurs. Needless to say it was foolish of > Snape to rush to the tower. > > So I would expect a foolish decision from Lupin, such as > deciding to leave a trail for Snape out to the Shack, not > some kind of selective amnesia. > Neri: I always thought that the jinx causes your secrets to be revealed (at least I thought so after GoF, and Umbridge and Snape certainly fit with this). Had Lupin only drank the wolfsbane potion 10 minutes before he saw Sirius and Pettigrew on the map, he would have probably kept his job. > Pippin: > And it's not OOC for Hermione, because > when the arena shifts from words to action, she's still at this > point got a tendency to freeze rather than fight. > Neri: Hermione charged mass-murderer!Sirius bare handed just an hour earlier. And here she's not even expected to act, only to speak her mind. She did that to Lupin, in full CAPS LOCK mode, when he was the big bad werewolf and had all the wands in his hands. Was she OOC then? > Pippin: > I admit I haven't been consistent about Lupin's motives. I'm > not trying to argue the case like a lawyer, picking the most > convincing story and discarding everything that doesn't fit. > It's more like I'm trying to solve a jigsaw puzzle with the > picture on the cover hidden and some of the pieces still in the box. > I'm trying to guess what the hidden parts of the puzzle show. > Neri: As Faith would say, watertightness is the most difficult part in making a theory float . If you attack Goodguy!Lupin because he behaves like a plot device, because his supposed motives don't make sense, and so on, I think it would only be fair to compare it with ESE!Lupin on the same ground. It's very easy to attack the smallest details in Goodguy!Lupin (like his steely tone of voice!) when ESE!Lupin is so nebulous that we're not even sure what his motives can be. Pip!Sqeak at least presented all the motives and actions of MAGIC-DISHWASHER!Snape in the Shrieking Shack, step by step, in several very detailed posts. It made sense to me considerably more than ESE!Lupin (MD!Snape at least doesn't change his motives every 10 minutes) but it also helped to clarify the weakness in the theory, for me at least - that it's so complicated. > Pippin: > JKR usually doesn't tell us too much about the subvillains' > motives until they have their big Idunnit and here's why > scene. Quirrell was power mad? Riddle was Voldemort? > Who knew? > Neri: Of course she doesn't tell us about their motives. It would have been a slight giveaway, I'd think . But when their motives are uncovered in the end they turn out to be very simple and consistent. Quirrell doesn't change his motive at all since he's taken by Voldy. Diary!Riddle merely changes his first priority from killing muggleborns to killing Harry Potter. Crouch Jr. never changes his motives. They are true ESEs. It's only Ever-So-Wavering!Lupin who changes his motives four times in a single night. > Pippin: > What I can tell for sure at this point is that wavering *is* > Lupin's character. Neri: Oh, I get it now. The consistency in ESE!Lupin's character is his inconsistency. That could be JKR's line of defense from the critics. > Pippin: > That's canon. He wavered about whether > to continue the animagi outings, and he wavered as an adult > over whether to tell Dumbledore about Sirius, and then > about whether to pursue his interest in Tonks. So I don't > think it would be out of character for him to waver a bit in > the Shrieking Shack. > Neri: Don't you have a bit of a logic problem here? If Lupin's conscience was troubling him, when the other Marauders were untroubled, that's a good thing. If Lupin confesses to his own failings, which really aren't worse than those of James or Sirius, that's not a sign of Evil. Unless he was only playacting to hide his true evil objectives, but in that case you can't blame him for wavering. > Pippin: > I grinned when the website told us when his birthday was. > He's a Pisces, the sign of two fish swimming in opposite > directions. Pisces supposedly find it difficult > to make up their minds. > Neri: They are also supposedly sensitive, companionate, kind, selfless and sympathetic, http://www.astrology-online.com/pisces.htm which fits Lupin's character well, I'd say. Ain't astrology wonderful? You can prove anything you like with it . > Pippin: > We also know that Lupin wants everyone to like him, > everyone he respects, at least. He doesn't seem to care > if Slytherins or Ministry officials like him or not. But it's > hard, isn't it, not to respect people who're fighting > for your freedom, even if they're doing terrible things? > Neri: Even when they're doing terrible things to his friends? Even when they support the very werewolf who had bitten him? Sorry, I don't think I'd buy such a schizoid character. Perhaps I could accept him if JKR described convincingly how these contradictions came about. But creating such a character in the dark only to spring him on us as the ESE, like some demon-ex-machina, that would be very bad writing. > Pippin: > He's got to be tempted by what Voldemort has to > offer, no matter how hard it would be to make > Voldemort keep his end of the bargain. > > "If they're offered freedoms we've been denying > them for centuries, they're going to be tempted." > Those are Lupin's words, explaining why the Goblins, > even though they know what Voldemort is capable of, > might listen to him and help him. > Neri: And he's saying "*we've* been denying them". He's casting himself as a human and a Wizard. > Pippin: > JKR established that AK leaves no mark, and had Dumbledore > repeat it in HBP, just to make sure we didn't forget it. Neri: I never thought Dumbledore's blood came from the AK. It trickled from the mouth. The first time I read it I automatically assumed it's internal bleeding from the potion, which came out of his mouth when he landed on his back. > She points out > (deviously) that blood usually dries quickly, both in the episode with > Harry's face, and by letting us know that dragon blood *doesn't* > dry quickly. Horace magicks it off the walls and pronounces it > still usable. > > After all that finicky detail, there's poor Dumbledore, supposedly > lying dead for all that time, supposedly AK'd, with a trickle of blood on his > face that Harry easily wipes away. Neri: Umm, it's not written that he wipes it "easily" and it's not written that he wipes it "away". And from my own experience it isn't that difficult to wipe a single trickle of dry blood (especially if your sleeves are likely soaking with water and sweat). If that was a clue it could have been written less ambiguously. > Pippin: > If it's not important, it contradicts > the logic of reminding us about the rules for AK and the logic of how blood > is treated in the story, otherwise a matter of some > significance. It might work in an absurdist or dreamlike fantasy, > but the atmosphere of the books has become steadily more realistic. > Neri: I'm not sure at all that JKR ever formulized "logic of how blood is treated in the story". This isn't like formulizing rules of magic (and even the rules of magic aren't terribly consistent throughout the story, you know). Blood is mentioned in *lots* of places in the series, so why not connecting Dumbledore's trickle of blood to, say, Nosebleed Nougat? It also makes blood trickle continuously. This would of course suggest that Fred and George are producing potions for Voldy. Hmm, this can be my humble contribution to the ESE!Weaslies theory. I'd be a bit more interested in Dumbledore's trickle of blood if I could see any advantages in it. However, Harry was still released from the body bind within the few seconds after the AK, and I don't believe Dumbledore would have released Harry willingly. So he at least lost consciousness, and Dumbledore "spread-eagle, broken" shows he fell in a violent way. I really don't like thinking about Dumbledore dying slowly that way, and it wouldn't improve Snape's situation by much. Neri From belviso at attglobal.net Sun Jan 29 03:09:25 2006 From: belviso at attglobal.net (Magpie) Date: Sat, 28 Jan 2006 22:09:25 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: VA/H=Mx13+RP? Snape's Culpability? References: Message-ID: <017601c62481$6940bfb0$6180400c@Spot> No: HPFGUIDX 147218 > Pippin: > DDM!Snape fan though I am, I don't think DE Snape was unaware that > enemies of the Dark Lord, "those who have thrice defied him" > were going to be killed. Of course they would, that's what > happens in war. If they don't want to be killed, let them stop > being enemies. Magpie: Yes. It gets back to the idea of everyone really not being on the same side with the same pov. Voldemort is not the evil guy from the DE's pov--he's the guy who's purging the world of filth. Even if he's doing things that are dark, if you are a DE you are on board with this, you see the reward for these things as being worth it for whatever reason you do. If someone had a prophecy that predicted Voldeort I've no doubt plenty of people would think it might be a good idea to take Tom Riddle out, baby or not. Another thing that's funny to remember is that the other side thought Harry was a *Dark* wizard when he defeated Voldemort. Don't know exactly how that adds, but it is kind of interesting. In their mind Snape's prophecy would have taken out a powerful Dark Wizard, Darker than Voldemort. This has nothing to do with Snape being less culpable--the consequence of Voldemort targetting Harry is obviously a forseeable consequence of what he Snape did. I don't think Snape was *confused* by finding out how Voldemort interpreted it. Dismayed, but he surely realized that this was a logical interpretation of the prophecy Snape gave him--that's why he took stpes to undo it. What makes Snape less culpable is the fact that he took action to fix what he had done before. If that means nothing, what would be the point in people doing the right thing? If I were on the other side and Snape had genuinely repented and taken steps to help us protect the Potters, I would consider his past forgiven and not to be brought up again--he's a valuable member of our side now. If the Potters died anyway (as they did) then yes, I'd imagine Snape still felt some responsibility but I wouldn't lay it on him myself because he already owned up to his mistake and did something to make it right. In that scenario, Peter's decision to betray the Potters stands on its own, a completely separate, free choice to betray them. -m From ceridwennight at hotmail.com Sun Jan 29 04:00:15 2006 From: ceridwennight at hotmail.com (Ceridwen) Date: Sun, 29 Jan 2006 04:00:15 -0000 Subject: Black Family Tree *possible spoilers* In-Reply-To: <20060128205148.60543.qmail@web53113.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147219 Juli: > The Potters (Dorea 1920-1977 & Charlus) had 1 son... maybe they're James' parents?, and James, having married a "mudblood" was erased... > > Check it out at http://www.the-leaky-cauldron.org/images/image.php? image=2006/01/closeupblackfamtree.jpg Ceridwen: None of the children of the daughters are named, and no non-Black spouses have birth or death dates. Daughter Belvina 1886-1963 marries Herbert Burke, no dates, they have 2 sons (2s) and one daughter (1d); Daughter Callidora 1915 marries Harfa(x?) Longbottom, no dates, 1s, 1d. Younger(?) sibling of Phineas Nigellus blasted from tapestry, shows burn mark. Violetta Bullstrode, who married a Black male, has no dates either, so only Blacks have dates, and only Black sons' children are named. Ceridwen. From xxneuman07xx at yahoo.com Sat Jan 28 23:25:56 2006 From: xxneuman07xx at yahoo.com (xxneuman07xx) Date: Sat, 28 Jan 2006 23:25:56 -0000 Subject: From the future -- Re: Hermione dead and MAJOR SPOILER to "The Sixth Sense" mov In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147220 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "jacques_poggio" wrote: > > Hi there, > > I might be wrong, but I thought it was canon that nobody was coming > from the future ? Or, at least, that all the characters were living > in their "appropriate" time scale... http://www.jkrowling.com/textonly/en/rumours_view.cfm?id=1 "I've also heard a whisper about Ron and Hermione's son time-travelling, so I shall go further and tell you that NONE of the characters in the books has returned from the future." So yes, it IS cannon. At least that nobody is from the future. However, since we would have noticed Hermione dissapearing in the past... Well, you get the point. But it was well thought out. -Neuman From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Sun Jan 29 04:27:46 2006 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Sun, 29 Jan 2006 04:27:46 -0000 Subject: VA/H=Mx13+RP? Snape's Culpability? In-Reply-To: <017601c62481$6940bfb0$6180400c@Spot> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147221 > Magpie: > > Yes. It gets back to the idea of everyone really not being on the same side > with the same pov. Voldemort is not the evil guy from the DE's pov--he's > the guy who's purging the world of filth. Alla: Yes, indeed, but from JKR's point of view, IMO of course, wrong side is wrong side, no matter what, so characters may think that they are right, but JKR is IMO is not shy expressing disagreement with character's judgment. There ARE many books where "sides' so to speak are not so clearly shown and the right side is the one the character thinks is the one and supposedly good characters do bad things and supposedly bad characters do good things, etc,etc. The sides in "Potterverse" IMO are drawn very clearly, as I said in the past, so if character THINKS that he is right that does not mean that author thinks that the character is indeed right. So, in the different book, I would see your argument with more clarity, in Potterverse, it completely falls for me. Sorry! JKR may allow characters to change and realise that they were wrong in the past, but there is asolutely no way, IMO of course that she would show that Voldemort's SIDE is right, was right all along. It is IMO quite simple - those who fought for Voldemort who want redemption, in Potterverse are sort of obligated to realise that what they fought for was wrong, end of story. Regulus realised that and either died as a hero or maybe resurface as a hero ( I keep thinking that Regulus could show up, since he is dead "these days). People keep saying that Snape realised that. :-) Which is entirely possible of course. ;) Magpie: > This has nothing to do with Snape being less culpable--the consequence of > Voldemort targetting Harry is obviously a forseeable consequence of what he > Snape did. I don't think Snape was *confused* by finding out how Voldemort > interpreted it. Dismayed, but he surely realized that this was a logical > interpretation of the prophecy Snape gave him--that's why he took stpes to > undo it. Alla: LOL! Agreed, so what did you argue the point above for? Just curious. Magpie: What makes Snape less culpable is the fact that he took action to > fix what he had done before. If that means nothing, what would be the point > in people doing the right thing? Alla: YES, it means something, sure, IF Snape indeed tried to do the right thing, except I am not sure that Snape indeed tried to do it. Magpie: In that scenario, Peter's decision to betray the Potters > stands on its own, a completely separate, free choice to betray them. Alla: On that I disagree completely. I did say yesterday that sure Peter is much guiltier in Potters deaths if Snape tried to do the right thing, but without Snape's doing his deed, Peter may not have NEEDED to do that choice, ever, so in my book it can NEVER be evaluated completely separate from what Snape did. IMO they tied together and it just cannot be undone. JMO, Alla From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Sun Jan 29 04:57:40 2006 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Sun, 29 Jan 2006 04:57:40 -0000 Subject: Draco and Harry In-Reply-To: <002601c6245a$b5203040$14b2a8c0@rechnerchen> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147222 Miles: My impression of some listies who see Draco as > "evil" is, that they more or less share Harry's PoV (which is parallel to > the narrator's PoV), whereas others try to keep a distant and critical view > of the narrator's evaluation - but we discussed this before to the point of > disagreement (hi Alla :-) ). Alla: Yes, indeed. :) Because no matter which look I use when I read the book - either looking with Harry's eyes, which I certainly get the most enjoyment from the books, or with the look of outside observer, Draco just does not become LESS bigoted to me, not at all. SO, yeah, up till now I see Draco as bigot. 'Evil" per se, maybe not, although three assasination attempts, two of which were almost succesful would be IMO enough to qualify character as quite evil, but Draco is quite young so he can still change, but do I see him as evil as much as "bigoted" character can be evil as of today? Sure I do. Unless of course the argument is that Draco did not really said those words to Hermione in CoS and narrator and/or Harry were hallucinating or having hearing problems and the same thing in GoF, when Draco was issuing death threats to Ron and Hermione, he was really saying something completely different. I believe that POV has nothing to do with evaluating Draco as a bigot. POV of the narrator and Harry is INCOMPLETE, that is for sure, but what we SEE is what we get , IMO of course. I also said in the past - I cannot blame Harry at all for not willing to look what is hidden behind Draco's bigotry. I would not be doing that either, unless forced and it is quite possible that Harry would be forced to do so in book 7. Hopefully Draco will figure out where he wants to stand by that time. JMO, Alla. From belviso at attglobal.net Sun Jan 29 04:46:44 2006 From: belviso at attglobal.net (Magpie) Date: Sat, 28 Jan 2006 23:46:44 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: VA/H=Mx13+RP? Snape's Culpability? References: Message-ID: <01a301c6248f$01f34040$6180400c@Spot> No: HPFGUIDX 147223 > Alla: > The sides in "Potterverse" IMO are drawn very clearly, as I said in > the past, so if character THINKS that he is right that does not mean > that author thinks that the character is indeed right. So, in the > different book, I would see your argument with more clarity, in > Potterverse, it completely falls for me. Sorry! JKR may allow > characters to change and realise that they were wrong in the past, > but there is asolutely no way, IMO of course that she would show > that Voldemort's SIDE is right, was right all along. Magpie: Err...of course not. I didn't realize I was saying that JKR thought that Snape would be right in any objective sense in doing anything to get the Potters killed. I'm saying that as the author she doesn't have to agree with both sides, but she has to write the people on the other side as honestly agreeing with it, which Snape did at the time. The point is that Snape *did* change (maybe) and stopped doing the wrong thing (in JKR's and, I think, most normal people's) view and started doing the right thing (warning Dumbledore of what Voldemort was planning so that the Potters could protect themselves). > Alla: > > LOL! Agreed, so what did you argue the point above for? Just curious. Magpie: I guess I was saying that Snape was always doing what he thought was the right thing (or at least the justified thing), but came to see that what he once thought was right was, in fact, wrong (if he realized it). It seemed like there was an argument being made that Snape was responsible for the Potters' deaths, even more so than Peter, no matter what he did. That's how Harry sees it. If Snape never really repented and has been working for Voldemort this whole time then yeah, I'd guess his telling Dumbledore about Voldemort's plans probably didn't help the Potters at all and Snape is still very much in on the plot to kill them. In that case he probably knew that Dumbledore's attempts to protect them were useless. But if he did take steps to protect the Potters, I think he made up for what he did and you just have to move forward from that. > Alla: > > On that I disagree completely. I did say yesterday that sure Peter > is much guiltier in Potters deaths if Snape tried to do the right > thing, but without Snape's doing his deed, Peter may not have NEEDED > to do that choice, ever, so in my book it can NEVER be evaluated > completely separate from what Snape did. IMO they tied together and > it just cannot be undone. Magpie: Imo, since you can't turn back time, it's pointless to hold Snape responsible for that. Practically, you can't talk about the story of how the Potters came to be murdered without Snape. His actions are part of the plot. But I don't think the fact that Peter's own test came later in the chain of events ties Snape to that decision. We're all in an endless chain of events. So in terms of blaming Snape as if he deserves punishment or should be held accountable *if* he repented and did the best he could to fix what he did no, I don't agree. I think we just have to let things go and forgive people and look to the future. Going back to what Snape should have done seems like the kind of bad cycle of thinking Snape himself is stuck in. -m From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Sun Jan 29 05:44:08 2006 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Sun, 29 Jan 2006 05:44:08 -0000 Subject: VA/H=Mx13+RP? Snape's Culpability? In-Reply-To: <01a301c6248f$01f34040$6180400c@Spot> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147224 > > Magpie: But if he did take > steps to protect the Potters, I think he made up for what he did and you > just have to move forward from that. Alla: Keep in mind that it is after midnight here, so I may not express myself as clear as I wish ( I probably should not write anything that late), but here is what I think today - as I said YES, Snape gets a cookie if he tried to do a right thing, but in my book there are some decisions you just cannot completely make up for , no matter how hard you try. So, Snape doing the right thing (IF he did, which as I said I am not sure at all), it mitigates what he did in my eyes, BUT I am not willing to say that it never happened - he unleashed a HUGE chain reaction, IMO, he is guilty and always be guilty of that. I guess what I am saying is that he cannot make up for that completely, unless he is able to return Potters to life, which as we know he cannot. IMO of course. > Magpie: > Imo, since you can't turn back time, it's pointless to hold Snape > responsible for that. Alla: I disagree. Magpie: Practically, you can't talk about the story of how > the Potters came to be murdered without Snape. His actions are part of the > plot. Alla: I agree. :-) Magpie: But I don't think the fact that Peter's own test came later in the > chain of events ties Snape to that decision. We're all in an endless chain > of events. Alla: But Snape STARTED that chain of events. Not anybody else, but Snape. Without Snape's acting Peter's betrayal may have never happened, so YES IMO Peter's teast WAS Peter's test, NOT Snape's, but the fact that Peter's test came to fruition BECAUSE of Snape actions makes Snape a very guilty person in my eyes and yes, tied to what Peter did. Magpie: So in terms of blaming Snape as if he deserves punishment or > should be held accountable *if* he repented and did the best he could to fix > what he did no, I don't agree. Alla: Just want to be clear, you are saying that IF Snape tried to protect the Potters after what he did, basically his plate is clean and it is as if he never blabbed prophecy to Voldemort? Is this your argument? If the answer is yes, then I disagree. I think that if Snape is DD!M indeed, which I SO strongly doubt, the guilt of Potters deaths is something he is going to have to live with for the rest of his life, UNLESS Harry will forgive him of course. IMO of course. Alla. From AllieS426 at aol.com Sun Jan 29 05:45:30 2006 From: AllieS426 at aol.com (allies426) Date: Sun, 29 Jan 2006 05:45:30 -0000 Subject: Hermione dead and MAJOR SPOILER to "The Sixth Sense" movie In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147225 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "lucianam73" wrote: >I also don't know what that bit about the `shout from a room nearby, >then a crash and a scream' means. It strikes me as important, and it >happens before Harry, Neville and Hermione try to hide in the small >office. So, for justice's sake, I cannot disregard a bit of >information just because it doesn't fit_ I must wallow in confusion. Allie: Elsewhere in OoP, there is another suspicious sequence of noises with no explanation behind them that bothers me. Page 621, "The Centaur and the Sneak," as Dumbledore is leaving Hogwarts: "Coughing in the dust, Harry saw a dark figure fall to the ground with a crash in front of him. There was a shriek and a thud and somebody cried, "No!" Then the sound of breaking glass, frantically scuffling footseps, a groan - and silence." This could easily be explained by Dumbledore stunning several people and the general confusion that results, however, might something else have happened in that office? From erikog at one.net Sun Jan 29 06:40:39 2006 From: erikog at one.net (krista7) Date: Sun, 29 Jan 2006 06:40:39 -0000 Subject: Order of Siblings (was: The ancient and most noble house of Black) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147226 Written by Neri: > Phineas is Elladora's older brother (he was born in 1847 and she in > 1850) and he's on her left ? well and good. Callidora is older than > her sister Charis (1915 vs. 1919) and she's on her left ? well and > good. But what about Belvina? She's on the left of her brother > Arcturus, but is she older than him? Her birth date isn't very clear > in the picture, but it looks to me like 1886, which would make her > *younger* than Arcturus (1884). However, Belvina's birth date foils this nice consistency a bit. Can > anybody please convince me it's not 1886? I offer a free bag of ACID > POPS as a prize. I do agree it is 1886, but here's some hope for you: I think the order of children was altered for reason, not whim. If you look at the family tree purely as structure--just the lines--you see lines descending from the first and third children, and then those lines branch out widely to make room for *their* kids. This doesn't leave a lot of spare room on the page. Besides the threat of having cousins bumping into each other in the next row, keeping the original kids in order would create an unsightly imbalance on the page. (Since Belvina's kids aren't listed, you'd have a big white gap beneath her, on the right, and a pack of squashed kids beneath the other two, on the left.) If you're a human being doing this by hand, the temptation, I imagine, would be to make the tree look pretty and balanced. In re: the Black girls. I don't think space is immediately a reason to doubt their list order isn't the same as their birth order. You don't have fat branches coming off any of them yet, to cause this kind of space/balance concern. (Well, unless Draco has managed to reproduce several times over, God help us all!) Just my guess! Krista From gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk Sun Jan 29 07:00:44 2006 From: gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk (Geoff Bannister) Date: Sun, 29 Jan 2006 07:00:44 -0000 Subject: Black Family Tree *possible spoilers* In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147227 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Ceridwen" wrote: > > Juli: > > The Potters (Dorea 1920-1977 & Charlus) had 1 son... maybe they're > James' parents?, and James, having married a "mudblood" was erased... Geoff: The dates are feasible. The Lexicon gives James' birth as 1959-60 which would make him 21-22 when the Potters were killed. From hickengruendler at yahoo.de Sun Jan 29 08:52:23 2006 From: hickengruendler at yahoo.de (hickengruendler) Date: Sun, 29 Jan 2006 08:52:23 -0000 Subject: Black Family Tree *possible spoilers* In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147228 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Elizabeth Catherine" wrote: > Charlus > does not have a date of death on this teaser tree, so where is he? Hickengruendler: He is probably dead. Only those, who were direct descendants of Phineas and the others got a deathdate on the tree. Those who only married a Black do not have one (see Ursula Flint or Harfang Longbottom). Those characters also do not have their birthdates mentioned. From Nanagose at aol.com Sun Jan 29 09:09:26 2006 From: Nanagose at aol.com (spotsgal) Date: Sun, 29 Jan 2006 09:09:26 -0000 Subject: Black Family Tree *possible spoilers* In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147229 > > Juli: > > The Potters (Dorea 1920-1977 & Charlus) had 1 son... maybe > > they're James' parents?, and James, having married a "mudblood" > > was erased... > Geoff: > The dates are feasible. > > The Lexicon gives James' birth as 1959-60 which would make him 21-22 > when the Potters were killed. Chrstina: I think it'd make him about 17 or 18, which makes more sense. If James were 22 or so then we'd be moving into the time period where James himself was killed, and we know the Potters were dead by then. Although, it would have to be when James was 18 (maybe close to 19?) because Sirius said he was welcome for Sunday lunch at the Potters' house after he came of age at 17 (and moved into his own flat). Actually, I see the dates as being the least feasible thing on the tree. JKR, in the Mugglenet/LC interview: "James's parents were elderly...They were old in wizarding terms, and they died. They succumbed to a wizarding illness. That's as far as it goes. There's nothing serious or sinister about those deaths. I just needed them out of the way so I killed them." I wouldn't count 57 as elderly, even in Muggle terms! I can see JKR making mathematical mistakes during interviews or something, but not on a written document where she can catch them. I think this must be an early draft, and she changed the dates when she gave James the backstory of being pampered and such. Christina From gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk Sun Jan 29 09:28:29 2006 From: gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk (Geoff Bannister) Date: Sun, 29 Jan 2006 09:28:29 -0000 Subject: Black Family Tree *possible spoilers* In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147230 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "spotsgal" wrote: > > > > Juli: > > > The Potters (Dorea 1920-1977 & Charlus) had 1 son... maybe > > > they're James' parents?, and James, having married a "mudblood" > > > was erased... > > > Geoff: > > The dates are feasible. > > > > The Lexicon gives James' birth as 1959-60 which would make him 21- 22 > > when the Potters were killed. > > Chrstina: > > I think it'd make him about 17 or 18, which makes more sense. If > James were 22 or so then we'd be moving into the time period where > James himself was killed, and we know the Potters were dead by then. > Although, it would have to be when James was 18 (maybe close to 19?) > because Sirius said he was welcome for Sunday lunch at the Potters' > house after he came of age at 17 (and moved into his own flat). > Geoff: Sorry, I didn't make myself clear. When I said the "Potters", I meant James and Lily. I agree that if the Potters Senior were killed in 1977, then James would be 17-18. From lucianam73 at yahoo.com.br Sun Jan 29 10:41:51 2006 From: lucianam73 at yahoo.com.br (lucianam73) Date: Sun, 29 Jan 2006 10:41:51 -0000 Subject: From the future -- Re: Hermione dead and MAJOR SPOILER to "The Sixth Sense" mov In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147231 > > http://www.jkrowling.com/textonly/en/rumours_view.cfm?id=31 > > "I've also heard a whisper about Ron and Hermione's son > time-travelling, so I shall go further and tell you that NONE of > the characters in the books has returned from the future." > > So yes, it IS cannon. At least that nobody is from the future. > However, since we would have noticed Hermione dissapearing in the past... > > Well, you get the point. But it was well thought out. > > -Neuman > lucianam: If what happened was (or will be, since Book 7 hasn't been released yet - getting all the verbs right is a bore!) Book 7 Hermione travelling back to Book 5, there is no contradiction of canon whatsoever. It's the same situation in PoA. Harry and Hermione travelled back in time (3 hours), so it doesn't contradict that quotation either. And yet, if you look at both these situations from the POV of the characters in Book 5' timeframe, B7 Hermione is a 'character returned from the future'; and from the POV of the characters in PoA living in the timeframe three hours prior to H&H's Time-Travel, Harry and Hermione from '3 hours later' are also 'characters returned from the future'. So you see, there were two chracters who have returned from the future in PoA, if you look at it from a certain POV. If you take JKR's quotation literally, well, then she has contradicted herself. I don't see any difference between these two Time-Travel, canon-wise. Only one of them goes back 3 hours, the other one goes back 2 years. Lucianam From irene_mikhlin at btopenworld.com Sat Jan 28 11:55:58 2006 From: irene_mikhlin at btopenworld.com (IreneMikhlin) Date: Sat, 28 Jan 2006 11:55:58 +0000 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: VA/H=Mx13+RP? (was: Was the eavesdropper unimportant to Harry?) In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <43DB5BCE.2060105@btopenworld.com> No: HPFGUIDX 147232 lupinlore wrote: > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "juli17ptf" wrote: > >>Really, can anyone say Harry's limited suffering from Snape's >>nastiness even remotely compares with Cedric suffering a >>lifetime taken away from him? > > I can say so, and do. Mainly based on the fact that Cedric is not > suffering at all. Death is a one time phenomenon. Therefore the fact > that Snape persistantly and systematically abuses Harry over years DOES > have great bearing. Stinkbombs to a nuclear explosion? Give me the > center of the explosion any day over being locked for years in a room > of stinkbombs. > Wow. So your advice to a bullied child or a teenager would be "commit suicide, you wimp, and end the suffering". I do hope you are not volunteering on any helpline. :-) But thanks for sharing that, at least now I'm pretty confident JKR is *not* going to end the series your way. I was worried for a while. Irene From jlv230 at yahoo.co.uk Sun Jan 29 10:58:51 2006 From: jlv230 at yahoo.co.uk (jlv230) Date: Sun, 29 Jan 2006 10:58:51 -0000 Subject: The ancient and most noble house of Black In-Reply-To: <20060129012028.32486.qmail@web53315.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147233 > Luckdragon: > I like what's written under the title. Something about there being > many stories between the lines. This is the way I've felt about the > entire series. There are many clues if you "read between the lines". JLV here: In the actual paper, the article says '"between the lines" was the gnomic brief for the writers whose work appears on these two pages. Each was asked to fill an empty page, somehow incorporating that phrase', hence I guess that's why JKR wrote that as her subtitle. It is telling, perhaps, that she chose bloodlines as the thing she would actually write about. JLV xx From vuurdame at xs4all.nl Sun Jan 29 11:04:52 2006 From: vuurdame at xs4all.nl (festuco) Date: Sun, 29 Jan 2006 11:04:52 -0000 Subject: The Ending Re: The ancient and most noble house of Black In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147234 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Karen Chuplis wrote: > kchuplis: who hopes to the literary Gods that Harry does not end up > Frodo Potter. That is worse than Dead Harry IMO, since there are no > white ships in WW. What lesson is there is that? Fight the good fight > and be completely miserable for the rest of your life. Ugh. Made sense > for Frodo, but egads, not Potter. > This ending is very, very unlikely in my opinion, because if there is one thing we see in Harry over and over again it is his resilience. He has enormous, devastating blows and well, not exactly bounces back, but learns to handle them and grows. There is a huge difference between Frode and Harry. On the one hand Frodo has changed too much to fit back in the Shire. On the other hand, he also fails to adapt to the changing Shire. Frode had a life to which he could not get back. Harry still has to develop lots of his life. He has a whole new world to explore: the world of maturity. Yes, of course he will be affected by what happens in book 7, but it will not make a passive, apathic, depressed person out of him. It is not in his character. Gerry From miles at martinbraeutigam.de Sun Jan 29 11:12:02 2006 From: miles at martinbraeutigam.de (Miles) Date: Sun, 29 Jan 2006 12:12:02 +0100 Subject: eBook.pdf References: <6DDE009E-9077-11DA-A19A-000393B04DDE@alltel.net> Message-ID: <002501c624c4$d575b990$14b2a8c0@rechnerchen> No: HPFGUIDX 147235 Karen Chuplis wrote: > What is this please? Nothing comes through with it? > > On Saturday, January 28, 2006, at 08:40 PM, miles wrote: > >> Note: forwarded message attached. >> >> >> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] >> > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] DO NOT OPEN THESE EMAILS. It's not from me, I had a close look at my computer and the message yesterday. Comparing the source of this message with the source of one I sent, you see small differences. But someone on the list obviously has a problem with a email worm. Miles From Aisbelmon at hotmail.com Sun Jan 29 11:26:02 2006 From: Aisbelmon at hotmail.com (M.Clifford) Date: Sun, 29 Jan 2006 11:26:02 -0000 Subject: Peter's Culpability Re: VA/H=Mx13+RP? Snape's Culpability? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147236 > Magpie: > > In that scenario, Peter's decision to betray the Potters > > stands on its own, a completely separate, free choice to betray > them. > > Alla: > > On that I disagree completely. I did say yesterday that sure Peter > is much guiltier in Potters deaths if Snape tried to do the right > thing, but without Snape's doing his deed, Peter may not have NEEDED > to do that choice, ever, so in my book it can NEVER be evaluated > completely separate from what Snape did. IMO they tied together and > it just cannot be undone. > > JMO, > > Alla > Valky: Gosh, I hate to disagree with you Alla, but I am afraid I do. Peter needed no help from Snape to betray his friends, that much is clear, the impetus to do so was entirely his own, the will to see an innocent baby attacked, his best friend and his best friend's kind and beautiful wife murdered, and his other best friends lives cast in to dark chaos and misery all to save his slimy skin, needed no shove at all, he would always have done it, regardless of what opportunity presented itself to cater to his selfish ends, I don't think Peter can be with honesty, seen in any other light, his secrets are told. Now I also wonder why you see so unequivocally that Snape alone presented the opportunity for Peter to betray. What of the Secret Keeper issue? The Potters had a reliable and loyal secret keeper who would never betray them, but for what Peter had already done, ie spying for Voldemort for years, lying and betraying everyone that had every cared about him, the Potters and Sirius would never have questioned the safety of their secret, and exactly as you say above, Peter would never have *needed* to make that one particular decision of turning over the Secret to Voldemort, but then again, he had *already made that decision years before* so what difference could Snape ever have made to that? It actually seems like Peter was going to turn James and Lily over to Voldemort with or without the prophecy, and Peter will always be 100% culpable for that, right? Valky From vuurdame at xs4all.nl Sun Jan 29 11:30:53 2006 From: vuurdame at xs4all.nl (festuco) Date: Sun, 29 Jan 2006 11:30:53 -0000 Subject: VA/H=Mx13+RP? Snape's Culpability? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147237 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "dumbledore11214" wrote: > But Snape STARTED that chain of events. Not anybody else, but Snape. > Without Snape's acting Peter's betrayal may have never happened, so > YES IMO Peter's teast WAS Peter's test, NOT Snape's, but the fact > that Peter's test came to fruition BECAUSE of Snape actions makes > Snape a very guilty person in my eyes and yes, tied to what Peter > did. I don't agree. They switched secret keepers because DD thought they had a traitor in their midst. Peter had failed his test long before he betrayed the Potters. Gerry From R.Vink2 at chello.nl Sun Jan 29 12:33:13 2006 From: R.Vink2 at chello.nl (Renee) Date: Sun, 29 Jan 2006 12:33:13 -0000 Subject: VA/H=Mx13+RP? Snape's Culpability? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147238 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "dumbledore11214" wrote: > > Regulus realised that and either died > as a hero or maybe resurface as a hero ( I keep thinking that > Regulus could show up, since he is dead "these days). > Renee: In wonder, could it be Regulus took the Draught of Living Death? This has been mentioned in several HP books now, but we haven't seen it's effects demonstrated yet. I'm convinced we will, after HBP refreshed our memory of it. To be "dead these days" sounds like a possible description of someone who has taken this potion. From Nanagose at aol.com Sun Jan 29 12:52:34 2006 From: Nanagose at aol.com (spotsgal) Date: Sun, 29 Jan 2006 12:52:34 -0000 Subject: VA/H=Mx13+RP? Snape's Culpability? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147239 >> Alla: >> But Snape STARTED that chain of events. Not anybody else, but >> Snape. Without Snape's acting Peter's betrayal may have never >> happened, so YES IMO Peter's teast WAS Peter's test, NOT Snape's, >> but the fact that Peter's test came to fruition BECAUSE of Snape >> actions makes Snape a very guilty person in my eyes and yes, tied >> to what Peter did. > Gerry: > I don't agree. They switched secret keepers because DD thought they > had a traitor in their midst. Peter had failed his test long before > he betrayed the Potters. Christina: According to Sirius, the Secret Keeper is switched as a bluff. It doesn't matter whether there was a traitor or not - Sirius knew that his close friendship with James was common knowledge to many Death Eaters. He assumed that Voldemort would be targetting him for that reason, so by changing the SK he was keeping the DE's occupied and distracted from the true SK. Even if they found Sirius and tortured him for the information on the Potters, he physically would not be able to give it. Which actually makes Sirius's actions very brave - the SK switch didn't take any heat off of him whatsoever. He did it solely to protect James and his family. Now I do agree with your general sentiment, Gerry - that is, that Peter would have been a bad seed regardless of whether or not Snape delivered the prophecy to Voldemort. He had no problem passing on information about his supposed best friend, so I don't see why he would hesitate to pass on other powerful information (and I'm sure he did so). Also, it seems that the Order was losing the first war, and we all know how much Peter likes to keep with the winning side, with "big friends" that can protect him. The idea that Snape's actions put subsequent actions into motion is true. Peter would have still been a dirty little rat, but perhaps the Potters wouldn't have been targetted so heavily (although, I still maintain that they were safer out of the line of fire and under the Fidelius than they ever could have been as active Order members). But just because Snape may have set off a chain of actions doesn't mean that he is responsible for an action 3 steps down the road. That's a complete fallacy. Snape is responsible for what he did, not what other events occured in conjuction with his actions. Snape was doing a job. He was was dealing with information, a few words. He was working for a bad guy, and that is what makes him guilty of evil, but the sentence or two he passed on to Voldemort does not even compare to Peter's active betrayal of the Potters. If you want to trade on shaky logic, I'll give you mine - Peter's actions were closer to the Potters' deaths than Snape's were, by far. Snape could have given Voldemort all the prophecies he wanted, but without Peter's betrayal, the DE's would probably never have found the Potters. The problem of causation is just that, a problem, because in the HP universe, as in life, many different little things all combine to create disaster. If Snape turns out to be ESE, I will hold him to that. But even an ESE!Snape could have been truly repentant when he went to Dumbledore to join the Order. And if you hold with DDM!Snape, well then it's certain that he was repentant. I still think that Peter's *actions* were much more evil than Snape's simple passing on of information, but even if their sins were equal, I would still be more forgiving of Snape. Snape (supposedly, and I think he did) felt bad about his actions because he realized that they were wrong. If Peter is regretful about any of *his* actions, it's only because things turned out poorly for him. Christina From vuurdame at xs4all.nl Sun Jan 29 10:45:20 2006 From: vuurdame at xs4all.nl (festuco) Date: Sun, 29 Jan 2006 10:45:20 -0000 Subject: A Sirius question....(haha) In-Reply-To: <20060128023459.50034.qmail@web33609.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147240 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Scott Ampe wrote: > Kchuplis wrote: > I was just thinking today of what a different Sirius we have in GoF > from OoTP. > > > Wrigs21 wrote: > I do agree with you that Sirius's attitude changed a bit, but he was obviously depressed and annoyed........especially when Snape would report in to the order...I think Sirius was living vicariously through Harry...... > Wrigs21 > Gerry: I've thought about this a bit, and reread the scene and I think there is one major difference here: The danger is not for Harry, it is for Sirius himself. Sirius wants action, he does not really care about running risks. Especially in these difficult circumstances. But Harry will not let him play, Harry does not think the danger of Sirius getting caught and getting the Kiss is worth it. If Harry would be in llife-danger, wild horses would not have dragged Sirius in taking the risk, but for himself? Who cares (well, Harry, quite a lot). Gerry From katmac at katmac.cncdsl.com Sun Jan 29 13:55:18 2006 From: katmac at katmac.cncdsl.com (lagattalucianese) Date: Sun, 29 Jan 2006 13:55:18 -0000 Subject: Snape and DD In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147241 > > Lolita: > > I don't think so. She has enough on Snape already without making him > DD's great-great-grandson. Besides, I think that DD's trusting Snape > without additional familial relationship between the two is a far > stronger argument in favour of both of them than if they were somehow > related to each other. (I would take someone's undying trust in their > grandson as more biased than their undying trust in a person who's > not a part of their family). > La Gatta Lucianese: I agree. I would much rather see Dumbledore's trust in Snape based on respect for Snape as a person who has made some hard moral choices than on a tie of blood. If we must have Snape related to someone, how about this: Eileen Prince was the senior Mrs. Potter's sister. James' mother made a respectable pure-blood marriage to James' father, but Eileen married a Muggle, Tobias Snape, and was disowned for it; her pure-blood family left her to live, raise her son, and die in poverty. James Potter and Snape are thus first cousins, and this relationship would account for much of the hostility between James and Snape, who regarded one another as trash relations and a spoiled rich boy, respectively, with the blood tie making the hatred even greater than it would otherwise be. (If you don't think it's possible for first cousins to hate each other like poison, boy, have I got news for you...) It might also explain why James, when push came to shove, risked Sirius' anger by saving Snape's life; blood is thicker than water. It would also explain why Snape hates Harry sight unseen; "...another Potter brat, just like my nasty cousin." Finally, it would explain why Dumbledore is so firm about Harry showing Snape the respect he deserves; when Harry finds out that Snape is all the family he has left in the world (and Harry wants family more than anything), it will help if there is not too much hostility on either side. From foxmoth at qnet.com Sun Jan 29 15:59:39 2006 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Sun, 29 Jan 2006 15:59:39 -0000 Subject: ESE!Lupin condensed and Lupin and Sirius replies In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147242 Jen D.: It seems to me that the theory is a little unclear on Lupin's motivation. I know that LV > offers so many dark creatures the freedoms they've lacked in the WW > but how can a person who wasn't born a werewolf, who'd been raised > as a wizard, who was treated with fairness, even kindness by DD, how > can that person betray that? He's definitely had a miserable > existence under the leadership of the WW, unable to obtain or hold a > job (save the year at Hogwarts) but he's also an intelligent person. > The system he's in stinks, but it's better than the system LV would > organize, which seems to be just a reign of terror and chaos. Can we > really see enough motivation for Lupin, just being angry at the > treatment werewolves have gotten? I could see Lupin truly resenting [James and Sirius] but finding in the scheme of things, they were much better than any alternative. But is that enough motivation to turn spy? Pippin: I'm afraid when it comes to werewolves, the wizards are no more protective of life than Voldemort. Poverty kills. It has probably killed more people, RL, than all the psychotic dictators who ever lived. The giants are living in miserable conditions, but at least they're getting enough to eat. They're killing each other over lack of living space, but they're not dying of hunger. "What do you give a giant?" asked Ron eagerly. "Food?" "Nah, he can get food all righ' fer himself," said Hagrid. -OOP ch20 But the werewolves aren't doing so well. "I bear the unmistakable signs of having lived among wizards, you see, whereas they have shunned normal society, and live on the margins,stealing--and sometimes killing--to eat" HBP ch 16 Lupin goes on to say that Voldemort is offering the werewolves a better life, and that it is hard to argue with Fenrir out there. Fenrir, we find, is not starving. He's "a big, rangy man[...]whose Death Eater's robes looked uncomfortably tight." -HBP ch 27 I suppose that young Lupin was kept in as much ignorance over the plight of other werewolves as we were. Imagine how it would feel to find out the society you were desperately trying to make yourself a part of was colluding in the oppression of your own people. It would be like Hermione and the House Elves, only much worse. Moses, in that situation, ran away from the household where he'd been raised as a prince, and found God. Lupin found the Order. But the Order doesn't seem interested in fighting for social justice or reforming the Ministry. They haven't organized to free Stan Shunpike. Add to that, in VWI the Ministry was using literally unforgivable tactics against those it suspected of helping Voldemort, and werewolves were suspect just by existing. Both sides were attacking innocent people, but the Ministry was probably hurting more innocent werewolves than Voldemort was. Lupin, like many young people, would be looking for answers. And Voldemort has always been willing to tell people what they want to hear. He'd have made it easy for Lupin at first, just as he did for Draco. It might be Lupin was only passing along information about the Ministry, not about the Order. With the things the Ministry was doing at the time, that wouldn't have seemed like much of a crime. But it would have exposed him to blackmail. Voldemort might even have promised Lupin that as long as he kept the information flowing, Lupin's own friends would be safe. That could be how James and Lily escaped for so long. But then the prophecy changed everything, and Lupin had to make a choice-- either continue to help Voldemort, or tell Dumbledore everything. But even if Dumbledore could protect Lupin, how could he protect the other werewolves? If Lupin had made friends with some of them, and Voldemort was threatening to kill them, as he threatened to kill Draco's family...James and Lily had the whole Order to protect them. The werewolves didn't have anyone. Pippin From HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com Sun Jan 29 19:57:39 2006 From: HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com (HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com) Date: 29 Jan 2006 19:57:39 -0000 Subject: Weekly Chat, 1/29/2006, 1:00 pm Message-ID: <1138564659.14.12640.m29@yahoogroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 147243 Reminder from the Calendar of HPforGrownups http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/cal Weekly Chat Sunday January 29, 2006 1:00 pm - 1:00 pm (This event repeats every week.) Notes: Don't forget, chat happens today, 11 am Pacific, 2 pm Eastern, 7 pm UK time. Chat times do not change for Daylight Saving/Summer Time. Chat generally goes on for about 5 hours, but can last as long as people want it to last. To get into Chat, just go to the group online: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups and click on "Chat" in the lefthand menu. If you have problems with this, go to http://www.yahoo.com and in the bottom box on the left side of the page click on "Chat". Once you're logged into any room, type /join *g.HPforGrownups ; this should take you right in. If you have an Set up birthday reminders! http://us.rd.yahoo.com/cal_us/rem/?http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/cal?v=9&evt_type=13 Copyright 2006 Yahoo! Inc. All Rights Reserved. http://www.yahoo.com Privacy Policy: http://privacy.yahoo.com/ Terms of Service: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From stevejjen at earthlink.net Sun Jan 29 20:22:16 2006 From: stevejjen at earthlink.net (Jen Reese) Date: Sun, 29 Jan 2006 20:22:16 -0000 Subject: VA/H=Mx13+RP? Snape's Culpability? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147244 > Pippin: > I think something important is getting lost here. VWI was a very > dirty war. *Both* sides were using Unforgivable Curses. Yes, the > Ministry's policy was only to use them on suspects, but they're > not exactly particular about who they suspect. > > Snape the DE spy knew if he was caught, or even suspected, > he might be killed out of hand or tortured for information. He > would know innocent people, only suspected of being DE's, > who had been condemned, just as Harry does. Voldemort's cause > was no doubt more evil, but it would have been hard to tell with > both sides committing atrocities. Jen: The original comparison was made between Voldemort & Dumbledore: If Snape overheard a similar prophecy regarding Dumbledore and worked for him instead, he would hasten to tell him the information. My argument was it's not the giving of the information that makes Snape culpable, it's the choice of who to give it to. Voldemort & the MOM during the first war would be a different comparison and I mostly agree with your analysis above. Pippin: > DDM!Snape fan though I am, I don't think DE Snape was unaware that > enemies of the Dark Lord, "those who have thrice defied him" > were going to be killed. Of course they would, that's what > happens in war. If they don't want to be killed, let them stop > being enemies. > > According to Dumbledore, something changed > when Snape discovered that the enemies Voldemort was going to > attack as a result of his information were people that he knew. > Dumbledore says he himself didn't care very much if > "numbers of nameless and faceless people and > creatures were slaughtered in the vague future, if in the here > and now" someone he knew was "alive, well and happy." Jen: Here's the rub though, as you mentioned above Snape would have seen the ravages of war after being a DE for even a couple of years. Why were those moments not personal, not enough to make him see the light about how far Voldemort was willing to go? Did he not see anyone he knew personally die or be tortured in front of him? That's hard to imagine. Instead, a hated foe was the one who turned him round. Or his wife. LOLLIPOPS, life debt--what makes the Potters personal besides the elusive 'someone he knew'? Possibly Voldemort's decision to act on the prophecy and kill a baby WAS the first time Snape had the horrific dawning realization of who Voldemort really was. Sort of like Draco's realization his once superior family was actually expendable to Voldemort. Magpie: > Yes. It gets back to the idea of everyone really not being on the > same side with the same pov. Voldemort is not the evil guy from > the DE's pov--he's the guy who's purging the world of filth. Even > if he's doing things that are dark, if you are a DE you are on > board with this, you see the reward for these things as being > worth it for whatever reason you do. If someone had a prophecy > that predicted Voldeort I've no doubt plenty of people would think > it might be a good idea to take Tom Riddle out, baby or not. Jen: Yes, the actions & motivations may look the same, DE's can believe they are doing the right thing serving Voldemort and perhaps even tell themselves it's for the good of the community. JKR has certainly introduced a level of moral relativity into her universe. I know you aren't arguing Voldemort and the DE's aren't evil, just that they have convinced themselves their deeds are righteous and necessary (some have, some just seem to enjoy hurting others). The introduction of the soul in Potterverse ain't for nothing though, evil people can convince themselves they are serving justice but the soul can tell the difference. Magpie: > This has nothing to do with Snape being less culpable--the > consequence of Voldemort targetting Harry is obviously a > forseeable consequence of what he Snape did. I don't think Snape > was *confused* by finding out how Voldemort interpreted it. > Dismayed, but he surely realized that this was a logical > interpretation of the prophecy Snape gave him--that's why he took > steps to undo it. What makes Snape less culpable is the fact that > he took action to fix what he had done before. If that means > nothing, what would be the point in people doing the right thing? Jen: YES. We've discussed everyday evil on the list but I truly believe small steps in the right direction are worth something in JKR's world. That's why I can't view ambiguous characters like Draco, Slughorn, & hopefully Snape as being evil. I just keep thinking of her comment that James was brave the night Voldemort attacked, but the caliber of Lily's bravery was slightly higher because she had a true choice to make in that situation. Not everyone can be like Harry or Lily, good from the beginning and never being tempted from that path. Some of the characters get the even more difficult task of being tempted down the dark path, *questioning* the path they're on (crucial), and trying to climb the rocky mountain to redemption and forgiveness. Jen R. From rkdas at charter.net Sun Jan 29 20:52:07 2006 From: rkdas at charter.net (susanbones2003) Date: Sun, 29 Jan 2006 20:52:07 -0000 Subject: ESE!Lupin condensed and Lupin and Sirius replies In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147245 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "pippin_999" > Pippin: > > I'm afraid when it comes to werewolves, the wizards are no more protective > of life than Voldemort. > > SNIP > > But the werewolves aren't doing so well. > > "I bear the unmistakable signs of having lived among wizards, > you see, whereas they have shunned normal society, and live on > the margins,stealing--and sometimes killing--to eat" HBP ch 16 > > Lupin goes on to say that Voldemort is offering the werewolves > a better life, and that it is hard to argue with Fenrir out there. > Fenrir, we find, is not starving. He's "a big, rangy man[...]whose > Death Eater's robes looked uncomfortably tight." -HBP ch 27 > > I suppose that young Lupin was kept in as much ignorance over > the plight of other werewolves as we were. Imagine how it would > feel to find out the society you were desperately trying to make > yourself a part of was colluding in the oppression of your own > people. Pippin, Here's where things stick in my throat. Lupin, it seems, having rec'd his bite as a child and then raised to live as normal a life as possible, mightn't identify with werewolves as "my people." Yes, he's a werewolf, but is his identification more than academic, more than explanatory? Here's my question, is it fair in the rules of mystery-writing to introduce a less noble-minded reason? You mentioned blackmail and would it be fair to build an entire case for a spy on just preventing that from coming to light? Does Lupin need a huge noble reason to have turned spy? It seems to me, unlike Moses, he is a man without a people. Who wants to plight their troth with either the racist WW or the massively violent and frightening werewolves? See this is where Jo loses me. The "outcasts" she gives us are so unbelievable, not just a question of different customs or habits of dress. How would werewolves ever be fairly integrated into a non-werewolf society? Force them all to take the Wolfsbane potiion? Is that even possible? So if Lupin is the spy, I believe it has to turn on his weakness of character, the wavering you talked about in the previous post with Neri. And the fact that for many many years he's been attempting to cover one lie with another. I can't see him involved in the werewolf liberation front. I just don't know if his wavering character makes for a fair motive and if it's up to JKR's standards. Jen D. From bartl at sprynet.com Sun Jan 29 21:05:09 2006 From: bartl at sprynet.com (Bart Lidofsky) Date: Sun, 29 Jan 2006 16:05:09 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Hermione dead and MAJOR SPOILER to "The Sixth Sense" movie In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <43DD2E05.6090402@sprynet.com> No: HPFGUIDX 147246 lucianam73 wrote: > I think there are hints. We are informed all Time-Turners have been > destroyed, Bart: I'm tired of hearing this. We know nothing of the kind. What we know are all the Time-Turners belonging to the British Ministry of Magic have been destroyed. In spite of its importance in the Harry Potter novels, there has to be a lot more to the magic world than just that. Bart From bartl at sprynet.com Sun Jan 29 21:41:30 2006 From: bartl at sprynet.com (Bart Lidofsky) Date: Sun, 29 Jan 2006 16:41:30 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] re: Flight of the Prince In-Reply-To: <003a01c6242f$b6286000$0400a8c0@pensive> References: <003a01c6242f$b6286000$0400a8c0@pensive> Message-ID: <43DD368A.9090409@sprynet.com> No: HPFGUIDX 147247 Sherry Gomes wrote: > I'll be so disappointed if Snape is not Dumbledore's Man... because > after all, "The World is not divided into good people and Death > Eaters." Bart: It makes sense. Japanese anime is full of examples where an evil character temporarily joins the good guys to fight an even greater evil, without losing his or her evil nature, although it tends to be less evident in Western literature (where, when evil joins the forces of good, it's generally converted). What would this theory be called? The ESEDDM!Snape? Bart From willsonkmom at msn.com Sun Jan 29 15:17:56 2006 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Sun, 29 Jan 2006 15:17:56 -0000 Subject: back to Blacks was Re: Snape and DD In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147248 > La Gatta Lucianese: > If we must have Snape related to someone, how about this: Eileen > Prince was the senior Mrs. Potter's sister. James' mother made a > respectable pure-blood marriage to James' father, but Eileen married a > Muggle, Tobias Snape, and was disowned for it; her pure-blood family > left her to live, raise her son, and die in poverty. Potioncat: But, the senior Mrs. Potter is a Black, not a Prince. So she isn't Eileen's sister. I'd bet Prince ought to be somewhere, and I'd bet a small wizarding fortune Severus and Sirius are very closely related. There's a curse on that chart..it won't print properly! What's worse, my screen is very dark and it's difficult to see details. Does anyone else see marks or numbers beside Phineas, the burned mark at his generation, the out of sight name near Dorea and at any others? The one at the person near Dorea looks like a small 3. Also, the lady who is married to Harfang Longbottom is not Neville's Gram. Her name is Augusta.(Isn't it? Drat should have checked.) Well, it isn't Calidora. So I'm assuming Harfang may be Neville's grandfather's brother. Although these names are very close on a piece of paper, it doesn't mean the families are at all close. I'd challenge most of us to draw up our own chart at this same degree and see how many of the people are really known to us. I'm not suggesting an OT thread, you understand. And I'm sure there are list members who's extended families are very close...but you get my point. Also, if you drew up your own chart, you'd put yourself at the center, so to speak and work up. Anyone who wanted to trace themselves up to Phineas and beyond, would limit the lateral details. The people you'd think of as relatives would be the ones your family most closley associated with...so that Ginny and Harry's kids will most likely think of themselves within the Weasley family, because there won't be any Potters to hang around with. I'm very amuzed by the crest...a shield with two dogs, stars and a dagger. Anyone out there want to take a stab at symbolism or clues? Potioncat (recovering from a new job and a cold) From Nanagose at aol.com Sun Jan 29 22:25:03 2006 From: Nanagose at aol.com (spotsgal) Date: Sun, 29 Jan 2006 22:25:03 -0000 Subject: How to contstruct an ESE!plot - ESE!Lupin In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147249 > Pippin: > I picked Lupin for my test, not because I saw treachery in him, > but because, in her consideration of who might betray Dumbledore, > another poster had listed all the characters who were close to him, > one after the other, with one exception. She had put Lupin and > Sirius on the same line. > > I began to wonder what JKR was trying to accomplish > by associating these characters so closely that people thought of > them as a unit. Usually authors try to make their characters as > different from one another as they can, conflict being the engine > of drama. I began to wonder if Lupin mightn't benefit, as it > were, from innocence by association. Christina: There are a great many characters that are associated together by fans. The Weasley parents (heck, the Weasley *twins*). James and Lily. The trio (we even have a cute little name for them). Fans might associate Lupin and Sirius because they are friends, but JKR almost never lumps them together this way. In looking at nine different interviews she gave where she's mentioned Lupin, only once does she put him and Sirius together (she was asked her opinion on PoA in relation to the other books, and she said that she likes it a lot because it has Lupin and Sirius, who she is "very fond" of). The other 8 interviews have JKR talking about Lupin independently, usually involving JKR gushing about how much she loves Lupin, what a great guy he is, and how happy she is that her fans like him too. If she could meet anybody in person, she would choose Lupin. If she could have one teacher from the books teach her children, she would choose Lupin. Now obviously JKR thinks carefully about what kind of information she wants to give out to the public, but I just can't see her saying "Oh good! I'm glad..." when a child expresses how much she loves Lupin if JKR is planning on making him this unbelievably evil character that you envision. Very few other characters get such praise. JKR only mentions Lupin's weaknesses in one of the chats, whereas it wouldn't have seemed strange at all for JKR to talk about Lupin by pointing out his flaws or simply replying with, "Yes, he's very fun to write" (the way she has done with other characters). But that's actually not my main issue here, because some people do see JKR as somebody who is actively crafting her message to trick us. I've never understood people who find the need to give Lupin's character a "point," because I think he has plenty of value. You mentioned conflict being the engine of drama, and making characters as different as possible. I'd like to point out the only instance I can find of JKR talking about Lupin and Sirius as they relate to one another (from her website): "Sirius is brave, loyal, reckless, embittered and slightly unbalanced by his long stay in Azkaban. He has never really had the chance to grow up; he was around twenty-two when he was sent off to Azkaban, and has had very little normal adult life. Lupin, who is the same age, seems much older and more mature." Lupin and Sirius *are* very different, probably as different as two people can be. Lupin serves as a balancing force for Sirius. Their "fatal flaws" are opposite from one another - Sirius has a tendency to be reckless and is action-oriented, while Lupin prefers a passive and thoughtful approach (which often leaves him overly static). The fact that they are around each other a lot only serves to emphasize their respective qualities. It starts even in the Shrieking Shack, as Sirius continually tries to move ahead with his plans of killing Peter, while Remus is constantly holding him back. Lupin's maturity serve to emphasize how "stuck" Sirius is - emotionally, the man is still 22. Lupin also has extensive plot-related reasons for existing. During PoA, he serves as the DADA teacher (there obviously must be one, and his story must be important to the book). He was also needed to serve as somebody who could diffuse the SS incident. He got HRH to listen to him, slowly convincing them that Sirius was innocent. Without his presense, there's no way the book could have ended with Sirius escaping, because no matter what Sirius said or did, the kids would never have believed him. The next question that one might ask is why Lupin pops up again in OotP. Well, first of all, a few characters pop up again for no real reason, to flesh out the Order (Mad-Eye Moody, for example), along with some new minor characters (Poor Emmeline Vance!). Secondly, Lupin is needed to fetch Harry from Privet Drive. Harry is reluctant to trust the visitors at first (when Moody calls out to him), but his anxieties are soothed by hearing Lupin's voice. Harry trusts Lupin, and so the mission to get Harry goes smoothly. It works the other way around, also. Lupin is the only one in the Advance Guard that has had personal contact with Harry, and he answers Moody's fears of Polyjuice by asking the Patronus safety question. Sirius needed to stay in 12GP, so he obviously couldn't fulfill this role. Arthur and Molly are new members of the Order, and Dumbledore isn't speaking to Harry. Lupin is the only person that Harry would trust without question. We also don't know the full significance of the Prank yet, either, which requires both Sirius and Remus, of course. JKR has killed one Marauder (James), established another as a traitor (Peter), and supposedly has some good reasons for killing off another one (Sirius). And yet, there is so much we don't yet know about James and Lily (particularly Lily, about whom we know next to nothing). I would say that Lupin's continued presense in the series will serve to supply Harry with crucial information, and/or accompany him on his journey to Godric's Hollow. This makes even more sense when you consider the fact that Lupin was largely absent in HBP - the secrets aren't ready to come to light yet. It all makes sense, so I don't see a reason to give Lupin an additional role within the series. > Pippin: > I was reading a book at the time on how to construct mystery > stories, and I thought, suppose PoA was a mystery and Lupin was > the villain, what was his crime? The book said that the author > must plant a clue to the crime in the sleuth's second interview > with the villain.... Christina: There are certainly some elements of the mystery style in JKR's books, but she borrows from SO many styles that I don't see how it's possible to start making predictions like this from them, based on such specific "rules" of mystery writing. JKR plays around with mythology, religion, the Hero's Journey, the British school tale, and many other story constructions. She also sometimes does things just because she wants to, without deeper meaning. > Pippin > There was the mystery of his transforming outside the Shrieking > Shack, which didn't make sense if Lupin's > transformation was unplanned and couldn't be timed, but > made perfect sense if it was. Christina: Even under the wolfsbane, werewolves transform with the full moon. There's no way to get around that, and this isn't a mystery any longer. JKR addressed the timing of Lupin's transformation in a Scholastic chat. > Pippin: > Peter should have known that James's friends would go mad and > seek revenge? After twelve years? And Lupin wasn't mad, the > whole point of discrimination against werewolves being mere > prejudice is that when they're not transformed they're just > as much in control of themselves as other people are. Christina: I don't understand why desiring revenge necessitates Remus and Sirius going "mad," or why we even have to talk about possible motives behind it. Peter betrayed James and Sirius. In a government system that allowed Sirius to rot in Azkaban for 12 years (and one that ordered a Dementor's Kiss for him), how trustworthy would *you* be that justice would prevail in the end? The desire for revenge may be wrong, but I don't find it at all surprising that Remus and Sirius reacted this way (and Peter shouldn't either). Some mention was made of Sirius having an excuse because of his time in Azkaban, but I think it's likely that he was planning on killing Peter that night in 1981. He tells Hagrid that he "won't be needing" his beloved bike anymore, meaning he either planned on dying in the conflict with Peter or killing him and being sent to Azkaban. > Pippin: > But Lupin is a good guy! Except...there ain't no such animal. > There are saints, maybe, but Lupin obviously isn't one of > them, so who's to say his flaws could not destroy him?.....The > characters do change, they grow, they learn, they die -- and they > fail. Christina: Well, yeah. Every character is loaded with flaws, which is actually one of the reasons I like the series. But just because the characters have flaws doesn't mean that these flaws will manifest themselves by turning to Voldemort. James was most certainly flawed. So is Sirius, Harry, Hermione, Dumbledore, etc, etc, but I don't think that their faults will make them ESE. > Pippin: > Voldemort is apparently the only adult wizard who is willing to help > the Giants and Goblins fight for their rights. Wouldn't he help the > werewolves, too? Christina: I think you are giving Voldemort way too much credit here. Sure, he might *say* "join me for your rights!" but do you really think that a man who bases his entire regime on the concept of pure-blood supremacy truly respects these minority groups, or truly wants them to gain their rights? He is taking allies where he can get them (and some of the groups, such as the giants, are powerful allies indeed). I think it's safe to say that even with a Voldemort victory, I highly doubt werewolves would be given the freedoms that Voldemort promises. I think Lupin is smart enough to see through that (and I'll come back to this in a second). > Pippin: > The very curious discrepancies between what Peter Pettigrew is > supposed to have done and his native abilities. And isn't he > exactly the sort of person Voldemort likes to frame -- someone who's > just barely tolerated, friendless or nearly so. Did any of the > Marauders really like him except for James? Christina: Where do you get that idea? I don't see Peter as somebody who is "just barely tolerated, friendless or nearly so." I think that's mostly a fanon invention. In the Moody picture that everybody is so fond of analyzing, Peter isn't just sitting with James, he's sitting in between James and Lily (who are "beaming"). He takes a bit of flak in the Snape's Worst Memory chapter, but a lot of people are playfully picked on in their teenage friend groups, particularly when they are boys. Sirius is a bit tactless with him, but he seemed to be that way when he was a teen. Sirius and James obviously trusted Peter enough to give him the Secret Keeper job. I don't think Voldemort has framed a great many people, so I'm not sure where you're getting that from. The only person I think that was really framed in the series was Sirius, and he was charismatic and popular. It was his recklessness in going after Peter that was exploited by the Dark side, not any lack of friends. > Pippin: > It takes a fair bit of analysis to come up with a theory like this, > and why should anyone take the time, unless they're an HP fan with a > thing for puzzles and an unwillingness to be satisfied that Snape is > the one. But perhaps I'm not the only one. Christina: Well, I'm certainly not an advocate of ESE!Snape. I've generally been ignoring those parts of your posts, because I prefer DDM!Snape already. I actually don't think that anybody will come out to be ESE in Book 7. Book 7 belongs to Voldemort. I don't think that an ESE plot is necessary in constructing plot twists - I certainly expect many of those. > Pippin: > But the werewolves aren't doing so well. > > "I bear the unmistakable signs of having lived among wizards, > you see, whereas they have shunned normal society, and live on > the margins,stealing--and sometimes killing--to eat" HBP ch 16 > > Lupin goes on to say that Voldemort is offering the werewolves > a better life, and that it is hard to argue with Fenrir out there. > Fenrir, we find, is not starving. He's "a big, rangy man[...]whose > Death Eater's robes looked uncomfortably tight." -HBP ch 27 > > I suppose that young Lupin was kept in as much ignorance over > the plight of other werewolves as we were. Imagine how it would > feel to find out the society you were desperately trying to make > yourself a part of was colluding in the oppression of your own > people. Christina: If the werewolves are forced to steal and kill to eat, it is because they chose to. Lupin says that they have "*shunned* normal society," implying a conscious choice. Fenrir teaches the werewolves under his care that they should be *proud* of their werewolf blood. He tells his followers not that werewolves deserve rights, but that they deserve, "blood...we ought to revenge ourselves against normal people." The werewolves don't want to live in harmony with wizards, they want to "create enough werewolves to overcome the wizards." Lupin says that werewolves think that their lives will be better under Voldemort, not that they will have more rights. It's a subtle distinction, but a very important one. And just what has Voldemort promised Fenrir in exchange for herding the werewolves? Rights to hold jobs? Clothes? Food, perhaps, so the poor werewolves don't starve? No. Voldemort is offering Fenrir "prey." Voldemort doesn't care about werewolves; he is using them as a threat - "Voldemort has threatened to unleash him upon people's sons and daughters; it is a threat that usually produces good results." Furthermore, it is Lupin that is explaining all of this, so obviously he understands what is going on in the werewolf-Voldemort alliance. Voldemort is getting a tool to threaten people with, and Fenrir is getting the opportunity to infect more werewolves. It sounds as though Remus suffers no delusions about how much Voldemort wants werewolves to have their "rights." > Pippin: > But even if Dumbledore could protect Lupin, how could he protect > the other werewolves? If Lupin had made friends with some of them, > and Voldemort was threatening to kill them, as he threatened to > kill Draco's family...James and Lily had the whole Order to protect > them. The werewolves didn't have anyone. Christina: It doesn't sound to me as though Lupin is making friends with the werewolves. They seem to actively dislike and suspect him: "However it has been difficult gaining their trust. I bear the unmistakable signs of having tried to live among wizards, you see..." The werewolves are proud of their lycanthropy. Denying or being ashamed of it is a big no-no. So is trying to live among the wizards they have shunned. I don't think Lupin would have a very big fan club in the werewolf world. And IF the werewolves were involved in VWI, and IF Lupin was sent to spy on them, and IF he did come to be friendly with a few, and IF those people felt threatened by Voldemort (wow, that's a lot of 'ifs'), then I see no reason why Dumbledore couldn't protect them. Remus mentions trying to actively convert werewolves to Dumbledore's side. If he filled the same role in VWI as he does now, he would have been trying to get werewolves to abandon Fenrir then also, presumably under Dumbledore's orders. Your parallel of Draco's family misses the point - Dumbledore offered to protect the Malfoys (even though they were a confirmed Death Eater family)! Why would he not have offered the same chance to werewolves that Remus might have met that were eager to abandon Voldemort? > Lucianam: > I'm partial to the ESE!Lupin theory, because not only it fits in the > Big Plot (I remember reading in one of Pippin's posts, what is the > excuse for two good grown ups around Harry? It's more logical if one > of them is evil) Christina: I already addressed my distaste for assuming that Sirius and Remus share the same role (because they absolutely do not - and there are many good grownups that surround Harry), but I'd like to comment on the fitting into the Big Plot. I personaly don't think it does, but the problem with ESE!Lupin (and many other ESE theories), is that no matter how well an idea might fit into the canon, fitting into canon is not the same as canon support. Would it be really cool to have Lupin involved in the Diary plot? Maybe, but there's no canon that I see actually supporting it. JKR could have made scenes involving Lupin MUCH more ambiguous if she really wanted to leave herself wiggle room to make him ESE in the end. She could have had Harry trip on the stairs while he was running to Sirius, only seeing the jet out of the corner of his eye. She could have played with tenses when Lupin revealed the identity of Wormtail, or had him interrupted. Instead of jumping at the chance to gush about Lupin in interviews, she could treat him as she does most other characters. She could have made a point to say that Voldemort was supplying the werewolves with food and clothing, and was promising them rights to schooling and jobs, an issue she very carefully sidesteps. She could have made Lupin more critical of Dumbledore. She could have left his reaction to DD's death out of the book altogether, or made it closer to Arthur's. She could have made the other Order members a bit more wary of Lupin, instead of making them willing to follow him as a leader. And on, and on. These would have been real clues for the theory, and yet they would have been subtle enough that the Big Reveal would still have been shocking. And yet, JKR doesn't do it. Christina From belviso at attglobal.net Sun Jan 29 22:08:11 2006 From: belviso at attglobal.net (Magpie) Date: Sun, 29 Jan 2006 17:08:11 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: VA/H=Mx13+RP? Snape's Culpability? References: Message-ID: <00dd01c62520$7fa9bf50$2f60400c@Spot> No: HPFGUIDX 147250 > Jen: The original comparison was made between Voldemort & > Dumbledore: If Snape overheard a similar prophecy regarding > Dumbledore and worked for him instead, he would hasten to tell him > the information. My argument was it's not the giving of the > information that makes Snape culpable, it's the choice of who to > give it to. Magpie: I agree (as the person making the original comparison). Giving Dumbledore the prophecy would lead, logically, to Dumbledore's protecting himself by the kinds of methods he used. Telling Voldemort would obviously mean more of the same sort of thing he does. Snape knew the goal he was working towards with Voldemort--the goal was murdering people so that others could be in power. Perhaps on some level he was convinced this was "right" in the long run, we can't be sure (I've seen little evidence of this so far). But I'm sure just as he knows that giving Dumbledore inforamation means that Dumbledore will act on that information while still staying within certain guidelines of moral behavior, he knew giving information to Voldemort probably meant more destruction of somebody. > Magpie: >> This has nothing to do with Snape being less culpable--the >> consequence of Voldemort targetting Harry is obviously a >> forseeable consequence of what he Snape did. I don't think Snape >> was *confused* by finding out how Voldemort interpreted it. >> Dismayed, but he surely realized that this was a logical >> interpretation of the prophecy Snape gave him--that's why he took >> steps to undo it. What makes Snape less culpable is the fact that >> he took action to fix what he had done before. If that means >> nothing, what would be the point in people doing the right thing? > > Jen: YES. We've discussed everyday evil on the list but I truly > believe small steps in the right direction are worth something in > JKR's world. That's why I can't view ambiguous characters like > Draco, Slughorn, & hopefully Snape as being evil. I just keep > thinking of her comment that James was brave the night Voldemort > attacked, but the caliber of Lily's bravery was slightly higher > because she had a true choice to make in that situation. Not > everyone can be like Harry or Lily, good from the beginning and > never being tempted from that path. Some of the characters get the > even more difficult task of being tempted down the dark path, > *questioning* the path they're on (crucial), and trying to climb the > rocky mountain to redemption and forgiveness. Magpie: Yup, that's what I think is important. I don't see any hints that we're supposed to think Snape was doing something noble by passing on the prophecy by any other definition than "it will please the Dark Lord and thus bring me glory." Regulus, perhaps, may have been more naive--we don't know that yet. But with Snape I think we should assume that he was malicious and was even fairly aware of that. I mean, given what we've seen of young!Snape it seems like he was always fairly bitter and wanted revenge against his enemies. To me, that's why it makes sense that his actual conversion *could* be linked to James being targetted in some way, because James was so important to him. That's another reason why I appreciate the way JKR makes quasi-parallels between the generations without totally making them the same. In the first book Harry/Draco is compared to Snape/James (they hated each other, Snape was a nasty Dark Wizard etc.) in a way that might make you think history is repeating itself, but their dynamic is not the same now--partially, perhaps, due to Snape himself and his own dealings with them. Anyway, I just mean that I think Draco's, Regulus' and Snape's crises of DE faith are all about different things that suit their own characters. -m From jlnbtr at yahoo.com Sun Jan 29 22:37:35 2006 From: jlnbtr at yahoo.com (jlnbtr) Date: Sun, 29 Jan 2006 22:37:35 -0000 Subject: Black Family Tree Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147251 Hi Everyone! I uploaded to the files seccion of the HPFGU site a word based version of the black family tree and its transcrip for those of you who've been having trouble accessing the file. Juli From exodusts at yahoo.com Sat Jan 28 22:46:32 2006 From: exodusts at yahoo.com (exodusts) Date: Sat, 28 Jan 2006 22:46:32 -0000 Subject: Harfang (Re: Black Family Tree *possible spoilers*) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147252 > > Juli: > > > Has anyone been on The Leaky Lounge Today? Well, there's a story > > about authors donating sheets of stuff, including our very own > > favorite, JKR. > > > > > > > > > Check it out at http://www.the-leaky- > > cauldron.org/images/image.php? image= 06/01/closeupblackfamtree.jpg > > > > Geoff: > > Having just taken a look, I spotted a tip of the hat on JKR's part. > > > > The bottom RH corner has the name "Harfang Longbottom". > > > > Harfang is the name of the ruined city of the giants in > > C.S.Lewis' "The Silver Chair" and, for the first time (slaps head > > hard), I've realised that Longbottom, of course, is a name in LOTR; > > Tobold Longbottom was the first hobbit to plant tobacco in the Shire. The problem with this sort of thing is that I wonder how deliberate it is. J.K.R. is *such* a magpie that it makes you wonder if she hasn't just plucked the name Harfang out of her own head, without realising how it got there and where it came from. This is an occupational hazard for writers, I am told. I'm re-reading the 7 Narnia books at the moment. I've only got through The Magician's Nephew and into TLTWATW so far, but every so often I read an isolated sentence that mirrors almost exactly a line of description from the Potter books. Now I don't believe that J.K.R. is writing HP while reading Narnia and thinking: "It would be cool to drop in a really subtle reference to Lewis by using a line just like that one." She simply soaks it all up and it comes out when she writes. exodusts From coverton at netscape.com Sun Jan 29 16:20:11 2006 From: coverton at netscape.com (corey_over) Date: Sun, 29 Jan 2006 16:20:11 -0000 Subject: merope's role in book vii Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147253 Hi every one. Hows it going. You believe January is almost over. Well anyway. What role do you guys think Merope will play in book vii? Or is she dead. Can't remember. But lets just say if she were alive what do you think she would have done to help Harry? Know one will find out but its somthing to talk about. Your fellow member, Corey From fuzz876i at yahoo.com Sun Jan 29 16:39:52 2006 From: fuzz876i at yahoo.com (fuzz876i) Date: Sun, 29 Jan 2006 16:39:52 -0000 Subject: special treatment of malfoy Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147254 I am rereading The Goblet of Fire and I have notced something. What I noticed was this in the chapter titled the Weighing of the Wands Malfoy has buttons made that said Support Cedric Diggory the true Hogwarts champion in red and when touched it turned green and said Potter stinks. This caused a a minor duel between Malfoy and Harry with the two curses rebounding off each other with Malfoy's hitting Hermione and Harry's hitting Goyle. When Snape approached and asked what happened Malfoy said Harry attacked him. Ron, even though he was not speaking to Harry at the time, tried to tell Snape that Malfoy had also tried to curse Harry and this curse hit Hermione in the face causing her teeth to get larger than what they were. Snape sent Goyle to the hospital wing and told Hermione that he saw no difference in her teeth which sent Hermione running away crying. He then puts Ron and Harry in detention with no punishment to Malfoy for his part in the duel. If you want to talk about unfair treatment of Harry and how he gets away wtih everything look at how Snape lets Draco get a way with almost anything just because Snape is the head of Slytherin house. This treatment of Malfoy has been going on since the first book and still continues throughout the entire series. There were two people that would actually dare to punish Malfoy and one of them was not actually who he said he was and the other is Professor Mcgonagell. Fuzz876i From rdoliver30 at yahoo.com Sun Jan 29 23:04:53 2006 From: rdoliver30 at yahoo.com (lupinlore) Date: Sun, 29 Jan 2006 23:04:53 -0000 Subject: The importance of death In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147255 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "festuco" wrote: > . > > > Wow, maybe you should talk to some parents who had their child > murdered and some parents who's child had a Snapelike teacher. And what do the feelings of Cedric's parents have to do with anything? The question, I recall, was whether Harry's suffering under Snape is not much less than Cedric's suffering for losing his life. And the answer is that that is a nonsensical comparison, as Cedric is not suffering at all. He's dead. He's abiological. His sensory and cognitive processes are defunct. He's no longer among the existing. Sorry about that, but it's the way the story went. Therefore he has no status as suffering at all. Did his parents suffer a great loss? Sure. But that is totally irrelevant to the way things were phrased. It is true, however, and this may be what you are getting at, that I don't share JKR's death neurosis. She said, in her last interview, that the worst thing she could think of was someone she loves dying. I can think of many worse things than that, and have suffered several of them (as well as having several loved ones die). I'm afraid that people dying is a fact of life, and although it is a sad and unfortunate fact, I don't understand or really empathize with her intense fear and horror of it. Sorry. Nor is she correct when she says that she thinks everyone shares the intense fear of death. Many people don't. Now, we have to make a distinction between the FACT of death, which I think many people don't particularly fear, and the PROCESS of death, which is often intensely painful and difficult and which I think it is probably true everyone fears. That is probably part of the problem I have with OOTP and GoF. I just don't buy that Harry would be so affected by the death of a classmate he hardly knew, for one thing. True, there are a lot of other circumstances surrounding that death that were traumatic, and which I could see affecting Harry in the way she displayed, but those aren't the things dwelled on in OOTP. Rather it is the fact of Cedric's death, which, considering that Harry had already been the instrument of the death of Quirrel, hardly seemed cause for such emotional overkill. And then she turns around and shows Harry hardly being affected by the death of a man around whom most of his familial fantasies revolved. Illogical and unbelievable, all things considered. Lupinlore From exodusts at yahoo.com Sun Jan 29 04:48:18 2006 From: exodusts at yahoo.com (exodusts) Date: Sun, 29 Jan 2006 04:48:18 -0000 Subject: Black Family Tree *possible spoilers* In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147256 Christina: > If Charlus and Dorea really are James's parents (which I am still not > convinced that they are - the dates are kind of wonky), then James and > Sirius could have been *very* closely related. James and Sirius could > have been as close as first cousins. I don't see anything *wrong* > with that, but I personally dislike it. The power of the bond between > James and Sirius lies in the fact that they were as close as brothers > even though no blood (supposedly) connected them. JKR has continually > demonstrated that the bonds of friendship can be just as strong (and > in many cases, stronger) than the bonds of blood. If James and Sirius > were blood-related, it weakens the meaning their relationship has, for > me. If the Potters were related to Sirius, it also lessens the > meaning (for me) in taking him in as a "second son." Ditto for Harry > and the Weasleys. The gift of family that the Weasleys give to Harry > is meaningful because they *aren't* his family (well, now they might > be, but you know what I mean). Those are just my personal feelings, > of course. > > One more thing that's really bothering me - if Dorea and Charlus were > James's parents, wouldn't they be blasted off the tapestry for taking > in blood-traitor!Sirius and treating him as a son? > There's a quote from the 16 July 2005 Leaky Cauldron and MuggleNet JKR interview that both supports and undermines the idea that Charlus and Dorea are Harry's grandparents: "As a writer, it was more interesting, plot-wise, if Harry was completely alone. So I rather ruthlessly disposed of his entire family apart from Aunt Petunia. I mean, James and Lily are massively important to the plot, of course, but the grandparents? No. And, because I do like my backstory: Petunia and Lily's parents, normal Muggle death. James's parents were elderly, were getting on a little when he was born, which explains the only child, very pampered, had- him-late-in-life-so-he's-an-extra-treasure, as often happens, I think. They were old in wizarding terms, and they died. They succumbed to a wizarding illness." James was supposedly born around 1959 or 1960. Since Dorea was born in 1920, that would make her 39 or 40 when he was born, thus a relatively "late-in-life" mother. But is 57 (her age of death) "old in wizarding terms"? You would think that in wizarding terms, old would mean OLD. And what about "I rather ruthlessly disposed of his ENTIRE family"? exodusts From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Sun Jan 29 23:45:34 2006 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Sun, 29 Jan 2006 23:45:34 -0000 Subject: Does anyone have any ideas as to how Snape was spying for the OOTP? In-Reply-To: <43DA8D50.7050504@sprynet.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147257 latha279 wrote: > > Although I am a DDM!Snape person, I really found it very disturbing that two people (apparently people whom DD respected a lot) - Bones and Vance - were killed following Snape's information passing to LV! > Bart responded: > Excuse me, but do we in fact know this to be true? And, if it is true, do we know that Snape's information caused the deaths? And, finally, if Snape's information did cause the deaths, do we know that this was not information that he was told to give to LV, which was thought to be harmless? The answers to all, three, at least according to canon, is "no". Carol notes: First, Bart is right. We don't necessarily know that Snape is telling the truth to Bellatrix. He carefully makes sure that Bellatrix is no longer in Voldemort's confidence before he claims to have provided information on Emmeline Vance or Sirius Black. He may not have provided any infomation at all on either of them. And he says nothing at all about providing information on Madam Bones (whom Voldemort killed in person). He mentions only Sirius Black (whom Bellatrix knows quite well that she murdered herself when Snape wasn't present) and Emmeline Vance, about whose death we know next to nothing at this point. (Snape could have helped her fake her death for all we know.) We can be pretty sure it was Wormtail who provided the information that Sirius Black was an Animagus as part of the story of his escape from his former friends in PoA. We also know from OoP that Kreacher, not Snape, provided the information that Black was dear to Harry. About the only other information Snape could have provided was that Black was back in England following the TWT, and since Snape couldn't reveal the location of Order HQ, that information alone was not sufficient to harm Black as long as he remained in Order HQ. And Snape himself tells Black (in OoP) that Lucius Malfoy recognized the black dog on Platform 9 3/4, reinforcing what Black already knows, that his "big disguise is useless." And later, Snape tells Black to stay at 12 GP and wait for Dumbledore, who is on his way, rather than going with the rest of the Order to the MoM. There's really nothing Snape could have told LV about Black that could have led to his death, which in any case, does not seem planned. It happened because he left 12 GP of his own volition and fought Bellatrix too close to the Veil. As for Emmeline Vance, it's possible that he provided information on her (with DD's permission) as part of his double agent role without that information necessarily leading to her death. Just because one thing follows another doesn't mean that the first *caused* the second. That's a post hoc ergo propter hoc (after this therefore because of this) fallacy. Since we know that his information alone didn't bring about Black's murder, it seems probable that any information he may have given LV regarding Vance was likewise insufficient in itself to bring about her death. Again, we have no evidence other than his words to Bellatrix, which could be lies or half truths, to connect him with Vance's death. IMO, Snape is only claiming to have provided information on two out of three people who have recently been killed by Voldemort or the DEs to persuade Bellatrix that he's loyal to her master. At any rate, as Bart says, we have no proof that Snape was really involved in either Black's or Vance's death. (Canon suggests otherwise for Sirius Black's.) And again, Snape says *nothing* about Madam Bones's death. That appears to be Voldemort's doing. As a powerful MoM official who could not be corrupted or intimidated, she was no doubt high on Voldie's hit list. But he would not have needed Snape's information to find her. She was a public figure whose whereabouts were probably well-known, and as far as we know, she was not a member of the Order. Whatever may be the case with Emmeline Vance (and the case for Snape's involvement is weak), there's no evidence at all to link him with Madam Bones's death. Carol, remembering Snape's words about a skilled Occlumens being able to lie to LV without detection and thinking that lying to Bellatrix would be considerably easier From kchuplis at alltel.net Sun Jan 29 23:55:25 2006 From: kchuplis at alltel.net (Karen Chuplis) Date: Sun, 29 Jan 2006 17:55:25 -0600 Subject: [HPforGrownups] The importance of death In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147258 On Sunday, January 29, 2006, at 05:04 PM, lupinlore wrote: > That is probably part of the problem I have with OOTP and GoF.? I > just don't buy that Harry would be so affected by the death of a > classmate he hardly knew, for one thing.? True, there are a lot of > other circumstances surrounding that death that were traumatic, and > which I could see affecting Harry in the way she displayed, but those > aren't the things dwelled on in OOTP.? Rather it is the fact of > Cedric's death, which, considering that Harry had already been the > instrument of the death of Quirrel, hardly seemed cause for such > emotional overkill.? And then she turns around and shows Harry hardly > being affected by the death of a man around whom most of his familial > fantasies revolved.? Illogical and unbelievable, all things > considered. > > > kchuplis: Harry is "hardly affected at all" by Sirius' death? You've read a different book than I. It's at the basis of all of Harry's actions in Book 6. I also feel that it is both the trauma of seeing Cedric, who is killed because of Harry (Harry believes, and I suppose is basically true). I never felt that he felt a personal devastation over Cedric but more of a traumatic one, indeed, linked to the entire extremely tortuous experience. I just don't see how he wouldn't eternally connect all of that together. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From littleleah at handbag.com Mon Jan 30 00:12:27 2006 From: littleleah at handbag.com (littleleahstill) Date: Mon, 30 Jan 2006 00:12:27 -0000 Subject: The importance of death Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147259 On Sunday, January 29, 2006, at 05:04 PM, lupinlore wrote: > That is probably part of the problem I have with OOTP and GoF. I > just don't buy that Harry would be so affected by the death of a > classmate he hardly knew, for one thing. True, there are a lot of > other circumstances surrounding that death that were traumatic, and > which I could see affecting Harry in the way she displayed, but those > aren't the things dwelled on in OOTP. Rather it is the fact of > Cedric's death, which, considering that Harry had already been the > instrument of the death of Quirrel, hardly seemed cause for such > emotional overkill But Quirrel had virtually ceased to exist as Quirrel by the time of his death. He had Lord Voldemort parasitic upon him, and must have been doomed even if Voldemort had succeeded in obtaining the Stone. It was Voldemort who had brought Quirrel to the Mirror, Voldemort who forced him to touch Harry, Voldemort who forced Quirrel to be the instrument of his will. If person A pushes person B in front of a bus, the bus driver is not culpable, and it seems to me that Harry is the bus driver vis a vis Quirrel. On the other hand, Cedric need not have been in the graveyard- Harry has brought him there by suggesting they took the Cup together. Harry is unconscious while DD or whoever disposes of whatever was left of Quirrel, but Harry has to take Cedric's body back to the Diggorys. I would have thought that was traumatic enough, even without the surrounding events in the graveyard. Leah From luckdragon64 at yahoo.ca Mon Jan 30 00:20:22 2006 From: luckdragon64 at yahoo.ca (Bee Chase) Date: Sun, 29 Jan 2006 19:20:22 -0500 (EST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] special treatment of malfoy In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20060130002022.23104.qmail@web53302.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 147260 fuzz876i wrote: I am rereading The Goblet of Fire and I have notced something. What I noticed was this in the chapter titled the Weighing of the Wands Malfoy has buttons made that said Support Cedric Diggory the true Hogwarts champion in red and when touched it turned green and said Potter stinks. This caused a a minor duel between Malfoy and Harry with the two curses rebounding off each other with Malfoy's hitting Hermione and Harry's hitting Goyle. When Snape approached and asked what happened Malfoy said Harry attacked him. Ron, even though he was not speaking to Harry at the time, tried to tell Snape that Malfoy had also tried to curse Harry and this curse hit Hermione in the face causing her teeth to get larger than what they were. Snape sent Goyle to the hospital wing and told Hermione that he saw no difference in her teeth which sent Hermione running away crying. He then puts Ron and Harry in detention with no punishment to Malfoy for his part in the duel. If you want to talk about unfair treatment of Harry and how he gets away wtih everything look at how Snape lets Draco get a way with almost anything just because Snape is the head of Slytherin house. This treatment of Malfoy has been going on since the first book and still continues throughout the entire series. There were two people that would actually dare to punish Malfoy and one of them was not actually who he said he was and the other is Professor Mcgonagell. Luckdragon: JMHO, but I believe Snape had to keep Draco thinking Snape was on Draco's side at all times. It was integral to the plot for Draco to be thoroughly convinced of Snapes contempt for Harry and his supporters. As for the other professors I could not say. --------------------------------- Find your next car at Yahoo! Canada Autos [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From agdisney at msn.com Mon Jan 30 00:24:57 2006 From: agdisney at msn.com (Andrea Grevera) Date: Sun, 29 Jan 2006 19:24:57 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: eBook.pdf References: <6DDE009E-9077-11DA-A19A-000393B04DDE@alltel.net> <002501c624c4$d575b990$14b2a8c0@rechnerchen> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147261 Karen Chuplis wrote: > What is this please? Nothing comes through with it? > > On Saturday, January 28, 2006, at 08:40 PM, miles wrote: > >> Note: forwarded message attached. >> >> >> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] >> > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] DO NOT OPEN THESE EMAILS. It's not from me, I had a close look at my computer and the message yesterday. Comparing the source of this message with the source of one I sent, you see small differences. But someone on the list obviously has a problem with a email worm. Miles Andie: There is nothing attached to these messages anyway. The same thing happened during the week to another member. Before posting to any list, you MUST read the group's Admin File! http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/files/Admin_Files/HBF_Text__MUST_READ Please use accurate subject headings and snip unnecessary material from posts to which you're replying! Yahoo! Groups Links [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From belviso at attglobal.net Mon Jan 30 00:30:46 2006 From: belviso at attglobal.net (Magpie) Date: Sun, 29 Jan 2006 19:30:46 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] special treatment of malfoy References: Message-ID: <012601c62534$6a2207a0$2f60400c@Spot> No: HPFGUIDX 147262 Fuzz876i There were two people that would actually dare > to punish Malfoy and one of them was not actually who he said he was > and the other is Professor Mcgonagell. Magpie: You make it sound like they're doing something unusual or rebellious in punishing him. Snape blatantly favors the Slytherins (no matter which Slytherin is involved), and out of those Malfoy is his individual favorite (he gives Crabbe and Goyle detention in HBP and says he's being exceptionally patient when Draco doesn't follow his orders to come to his office because of their personal relationship). What's even more extreme is Snape's *unfair* treatment of Harry, whom he personally dislikes more than any other student. (Though he's also giving him positive special treatment if you consider his protection that.) Other teachers treat Malfoy like any other student. McGonagall, Fake!Moody, Hagrid and Filch are all shown treating him like a student in need of discipline. -m From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Mon Jan 30 00:40:57 2006 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Mon, 30 Jan 2006 00:40:57 -0000 Subject: The importance of death /Harry and Cedric In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147263 Lupinlore: > And what do the feelings of Cedric's parents have to do with > anything? The question, I recall, was whether Harry's suffering > under Snape is not much less than Cedric's suffering for losing his > life. And the answer is that that is a nonsensical comparison, as > Cedric is not suffering at all. He's dead. He's abiological. His > sensory and cognitive processes are defunct. He's no longer among > the existing. Sorry about that, but it's the way the story went. > Therefore he has no status as suffering at all. Did his parents > suffer a great loss? Sure. But that is totally irrelevant to the > way things were phrased. Alla: I understand your rationale, Lupinlore, I guess, although I am hesitant to go all the way and say that death is better than what Snape does to Harry(and you know that I see Snape as an abuser).I agree with you that while parents suffer greatly, Cedric is not suffering anymore, BUT Cedric will not get to experience any GOOD things in life either. Let's put it this way - because of Peter Cedric lost everything - good and bad things that life may offer, while Harry suffered a lot from Snape, but still has plenty of opportunities to have good things after he is done with Voldemort( if he survives of course and I do think that IF he survives, JKR does not necessarily has to pull a Frodo on us). I think happy or semi happy ending is possible for Harry after all. Snape did not prevent him (of course if he is Evil, he may try ;)) from falling in love, having kids, etc,etc. Peter prevented Cedric from having all that. So, while I probably agree with you that Harry's suffering may be greater, Cedric lost so much more than Harry did,IMO. Lupinlore: > That is probably part of the problem I have with OOTP and GoF. I > just don't buy that Harry would be so affected by the death of a > classmate he hardly knew, for one thing. True, there are a lot of > other circumstances surrounding that death that were traumatic, and > which I could see affecting Harry in the way she displayed, but those > aren't the things dwelled on in OOTP. Rather it is the fact of > Cedric's death, which, considering that Harry had already been the > instrument of the death of Quirrel, hardly seemed cause for such > emotional overkill. Alla: Wow, it seems I found another topic I disagree with you on besides JKR's writing skills. :-) You don't buy Harry being affected by the death of Cedric? I definitely buy it. First of all, I don't think "hardly knew" is correct, because during the whole year of GoF Harry competed against Cedric in the competition, where there were only two other competitors and they did get to know each other well enough IMO, BUT I don't think it matters whether Harry knew Cedric or not. Cedric's death is the death of an innocent, the first death Harry gets to see with open eyes, so to speak, while he was not even aware that Quirrell died and the fact that Quirrell was not really himself certainly helped Harry not to dwell of it. Harry blames himself for Cedric death. Is it necessary to know the person to feel that you are responsible for his death? I can certainly imagine blaming myself for the death of complete stranger, IF in my mind there would be sufficient reasons for me to place such blame on myself. Now, such reasons could be totally irrational, but does it really matter? As long as Harry feels that he is responsible ( and I do not believe that he is), he will feel traumatized by it. It really rang true to me. Lupinlore: And then she turns around and shows Harry hardly > being affected by the death of a man around whom most of his familial > fantasies revolved. Illogical and unbelievable, all things > considered. Alla: Sorry, disagree again - Harry does not forget about Sirius at all and as I wrote in the past me being a Sirius fan and all, I would have been upset if he did. Harry does not go in CAPSLOCK mode in his grief, true, but all people grief differently. Harry is a subtle griever, IMO. I loved how JKR handled it, absolutely did. JMO, Alla From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Mon Jan 30 00:59:34 2006 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Mon, 30 Jan 2006 00:59:34 -0000 Subject: VA/H=Mx13+RP? Snape's Culpability? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147264 Alla wrote: > > Of course for DE Snape it would be a natural impulse to pass the information to Voldemort. I am just not getting how it makes him less culpable. Yes, he did passed the Prophecy to his boss, but the boss is the bad guy, REALLY bad guy, so if the argument is something along the lines that Snape did not know that the murderous evil maniac will act upon the information that the child would be born who can defeat him, as murderous evil maniac would act? I just don't see at all how Snape could not have known that. I am NOT buying stupid Snape and I am also not sure how Carol's argument fits into the picture at all. > > Snape was thinking in terms of rewards and punishment? Okay, but how is that mutually exclusive of Snape understanding that Voldemort will go for a kill ASAP? IMO of course. > Carol responds: Think about how long it takes to run (or be thrown downstairs) and to Apparate. That's how long young Snape would have had to think about the Prophecy. Possibly he didn't even think about the meaning and implication of the words until he was reciting them. At that point he would have seen Voldemort's reaction and realized that Voldemort interpreted the Prophecy to mean that an unborn child was the threat and that he (LV) intended to identify and kill that unborn child. I still contend that young Snape, intent on getting to his boss with a potentially important but obscurely worded piece of information, did not have time to reason it out. Just memorize it, Apparate, and report to LV. I'm pretty sure that he'd be thinking about the consequences to himself (reward or punishment) if he had time to think about anything at all--not about the consequences to some unknown person born at the end of July who presented a future threat to Voldemort. As Dumbledore said, it was only after he realized how Voldemort *chose* to interpret the Prophecy that it became meaningful to him and he repented. For all we know, he could have gone to Dumbledore that very day. Or he may have gone to him as soon as he was fairly certain of the identity of the child LV had decided to go after. And all that would require is reading the birth announcements in the Daily Prophet and keeping a careful eye on LV for his reaction to the same announcements. Again, we listmembers can read and reread the Prophecy at our leisure. Young Snape heard it once, delivered in a strange voice by a woman in a trance, and would have had little or no time to think about it. It's not as if he could take a nice leisurely stroll from Hogsmeade to Little Hangleton (which IIRC is hundreds of miles away). He must have Apparated, and he would have had only a few seconds of spinning through the air to get his thoughts together. If you have important news to deliver to Voldemort, news that involves potential danger to your master, you don't dally along the way to figure out exactly what the esoteric message may mean for the unknown persons involved in it. Had he done so, being a logically minded young man, he would surely have thought that LV would bide his time and discover where the threat came from, not act to snuff out an infant's life before he could become a threat. (How would Voldie know that one particular child born at the end of July was "the One"? Given the number of wizards in the WW, even those who had "thrice defied" Voldemort at some point in their lives, how could he be sure that he was killing the right child? What if the birth wasn't announced in the Daily Prophet and he killed the wrong child, thinking himself secure, only to find that "the One" had hidden for twenty or thirty years until he was ready to defeat him? If he had time to think about the Prophecy at all, Snape at twenty would probably have expected Voldie to think as *he* did (logically), probably in terms of a future rather than a present threat. I doubt that Severus would have anticipated the maniacal and paranoid response that you seem to think he should have expected. For one thing, his experience with evil overlords was rather limited at that point. He was young, he had only been a DE for about two years, he was not privy to LV's secrets (no one was), and he was not himself a maniac. But for reasons already explained, I doubt that he had time to think about it. He just delivered the message and discovered, too late, how LV interpreted the Prophecy. Carol, who doesn't for a moment doubt Snape's intelligence or think he's naive but doesn't think he would or could have interpreted the Prophecy as we do, with the benefit of hindsight and Dumbledore's explanations, or as LV did, in a way that was neither sane nor logical From kchuplis at alltel.net Mon Jan 30 01:04:17 2006 From: kchuplis at alltel.net (Karen Chuplis) Date: Sun, 29 Jan 2006 19:04:17 -0600 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: The importance of death /Harry and Cedric In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <5693AA10-912C-11DA-BADE-000393B04DDE@alltel.net> No: HPFGUIDX 147265 On Sunday, January 29, 2006, at 06:40 PM, dumbledore11214 wrote: > Sorry, disagree again - Harry does not forget about Sirius at all > and as I wrote in the past me being a Sirius fan and all, I would > have been upset if he did. Harry does not go in CAPSLOCK mode in his > grief, true, but all people grief differently. Harry is a subtle > griever, IMO. I loved how JKR handled it, absolutely did. > > JMO, > > Alla > kchuplis: Agreed. capslock!Harry is all about frustration, tension and not being allowed the information he feels might give him some control over a situation that he (quite rightfully IMO) feels that he is closest to and certainly knows about better than many of those in the Order. Grief and Harry is a much more private thing. He has always fought against a show of grief (it seems to me) in overt ways. It is more like it is something SO big, he has no way to express it in words, so he shuts down. I felt this was all very clear in JKR's writings. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Mon Jan 30 01:31:08 2006 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Mon, 30 Jan 2006 01:31:08 -0000 Subject: VA/H=Mx13+RP? Snape's Culpability? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147266 > Carol responds: > Think about how long it takes to run (or be thrown downstairs) and to > Apparate. That's how long young Snape would have had to think about > the Prophecy. Possibly he didn't even think about the meaning and > implication of the words until he was reciting them. At that point he > would have seen Voldemort's reaction and realized that Voldemort > interpreted the Prophecy to mean that an unborn child was the threat > and that he (LV) intended to identify and kill that unborn child. I > still contend that young Snape, intent on getting to his boss with a > potentially important but obscurely worded piece of information, did > not have time to reason it out. Just memorize it, Apparate, and report > to LV. I'm pretty sure that he'd be thinking about the consequences to > himself (reward or punishment) if he had time to think about anything > at all--not about the consequences to some unknown person born at the > end of July who presented a future threat to Voldemort. Alla: Thanks for the explanation, but I sincerely think that your explanation is not supported by the canon we have at all. IMO of course. Yes, you said at the end that you don't think that Snape is stupid, but from the picture you portrayed I see not just stupid, but idiotic Snape. He did not realise the meaning of the words? Erm... does he have sufficient knowledge of English? The Prophecy is ambigious, it is not that ambigious that anybody could not decipher that the one with the Power to destroy Dark Lord approaches, IMO. Do you think Snape thought prophecy had ANY meaning? What meaning do you think he susbcribed to it? Are you arguing that for him Prophecy words were just Abracadabra of unknown language and Snape had no clue what they mean at all? I can buy that Snape repented and tried to do a right thing later, I do NOT buy your Snape. Sorry! Because your argument IMO tries to absolve Snape of ANY wrong doings in regards to the Prophecy and that is IMO is not what canon says. If Snape did not wrong the Potters greatly in the first place, there would be no need for him to feel that remorse that according to Dumbledore Snape supposedly felt. Alla, feeling that she finds Magpie and Jen Reese position on that issue to be understandable, but thinks that she and Carol are probably on the opposite ends of the spectrum on this issue. From rdoliver30 at yahoo.com Mon Jan 30 00:29:44 2006 From: rdoliver30 at yahoo.com (lupinlore) Date: Mon, 30 Jan 2006 00:29:44 -0000 Subject: VA/H=Mx13+RP? (was: Was the eavesdropper unimportant to Harry?) In-Reply-To: <43DB5BCE.2060105@btopenworld.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147267 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, IreneMikhlin wrote: > > But thanks for sharing that, at least now I'm pretty confident JKR is > *not* going to end the series your way. I was worried for a while. > And what way would that be? I'm not really sure what it would be, myself, other of course than that Snape has to be severely (and very clearly) punished for his abuse of Harry and Neville, if JKR is not to be a reprehensible and poor writer indeed (poor in quality, but fabulously rich in lucre). Preferably there will be third party involvement, similar to the situation with Dumbledore's confrontation of the Dursleys. If I had to guess, I'd say that Snaples won't survive Book VII, but that's not much of a prediction as even Guido in the back alley won't take bets on Severus surviving. But what else would be "my way?" That's an interesting question. I'd have to say I'll be disappointed if all the Malfoys are still standing at the end, but I doubt they will be. Lucius is a ripe target for death, Narcissa could provide some pathos for Draco, and of course Draco might serve as a lesson in what happens to families that embrace evil overlords. Bellatrix is almost sure to fall, as well. I'm guessing not all the Weasleys will be alive when all is said and done. Which one(s) will go, though? I doubt it will be Ginny, she's Mrs. Potter in waiting, after all. The chessboard theory points to Ron. An ironic take on the boggart scene in OOTP points to Molly. And of course Percy could be wiped out without too much familial disruption, as he's basically cut himself out of the family already. Voldy will not be alive at the end of Book VII, not as we understand it, anyway. Will Harry kill him? I imagine he will, although JKR may pull some maneuver that technically lets him off the hook, so to speak. Dumbledore is permanently and really dead, I'm guessing. So is Sirius. Will Harry be a Frodo Potter as Miles suggests? I doubt it. I suspect he'll either be dead along with Voldy or alive and pretty much intact. Dumbledore emerged just fine from killing Grindlewald, and I suspect Harry will emerge just fine from killing Voldy. I suspect Hogwarts will be open, although I don't care all that much. I also suspect Harry will be Head Boy, although he doesn't want to be (Dumbledore wanted it, able to lead the Hogwarts student body into unity, keep the place open by being The Chosen One in attendance, yada, yada). Or maybe Ron will be head boy. I don't really care. Will most people be happy with the ending? Depends on what you mean by happy. I doubt the majority will be either particularly pleased or particularly disappointed. I suspect we'll have a very rushed time as Harry, et. al. deal with horcruxes and house unity, death but not taxes, apparition, appearances by all the promised people, a Weasley wedding, a plot twist or two, and a few lines here and there to scratch all the pressing karmic itches. JKR will pocket her further millions, we'll all move on to read her next books or not, and the world will continue spinning at pretty much the same rate it does now, give or take a few nanoseconds. So, I guess that's my way. I'd say I have a fairly good shot at getting it. Lupinlore From stevejjen at earthlink.net Mon Jan 30 02:52:17 2006 From: stevejjen at earthlink.net (Jen Reese) Date: Mon, 30 Jan 2006 02:52:17 -0000 Subject: Lupin & Legilimency (Re: Will there be an ESE!character in Book 7? ) In-Reply-To: <20060128182050.85485.qmail@web53107.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147268 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Magda Grantwich wrote: > Unlike Pippin, I don't see the necessity of inserting Lupin into > every scene where something bad happens over the past six books. > For me it would be enough for him to undergo a growing > estrangement from James and Sirius after the Prank, to find > himself in financial hardship after graduation, to feel a growing > resentment of his friends' personal financial security and their > inability to understand how difficult it was for him, to discover > after POA that the situation had changed and that he was now the > stronger Marauder and Sirius was dependent on him emotionally, and > to feel increasing contempt for the WW which sees itself as so > superior to other magical beings and yet is totally incompetent to > protect itself. > An ESE!Lupin finally letting the bitterness of decades well up and > overpower him would be a major shock to Harry. Jen: I never, ever thought I'd say this but your ESE!Lupin is one I could buy. JKR likes psychological twists, character traits which destroy from the inside. There's definitely evidence Lupin's lot is increasingly worse in OOTP due to Umbridge's legislation. JKR wouldn't have to go back over the whole story but start at POA and then use Lupin's turn to explain Sirius' death. For me the main unexplained situation for Lupin is why he appears to be a Legilimens and Harry doesn't know it yet. Pippin makes a case for him being an Occlumens as well. The way I see it there are only three possible answers: 1) The canon moments when Lupin 'stared intently' or 'fixed his eyes' are simply characterization and he's not a Legilimens; 2) Lupin is a Legilimens and it will come in handy for Harry in Book 7; 3) Sinister reasons. Any guesses? Jen, also curious why the question of ESE!Lupin has never come up in chats or interviews. From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Mon Jan 30 03:37:41 2006 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Mon, 30 Jan 2006 03:37:41 -0000 Subject: Regulus Black and significance of both DD and Sirius having brothers WAS: VA/H In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147269 Alla wrote: > > Regulus realized that and either died > > as a hero or maybe resurface as a hero ( I keep thinking that > > Regulus could show up, since he is dead "these days). > > > Renee: > > In wonder, could it be Regulus took the Draught of Living Death? This > has been mentioned in several HP books now, but we haven't seen it's > effects demonstrated yet. I'm convinced we will, after HBP refreshed > our memory of it. To be "dead these days" sounds like a possible > description of someone who has taken this potion. > Alla: Oh, I like that possibility a lot. Yes, I think that this answer was a bit ambiguous and we may see alive Regulus in book 7. I think I can really like him. I did not feel much about Regulus, who got into DE, but then realized that it was more than he could handle. I mean I pitied him a little bit of course, but I did not give him much thought, but Regulus, Slytherin!Regulus who committed the act of heroically defiance against Voldemort in attempt to redeem himself ( my interpretation of course, I could be way off base), oh, YES, this is my type of character. I do hope to see more of him. Atypical Slytherin, Slytherin who shows real courage, not just courage that Slughorn shows - to run in order not to join DE. Yes, I like Slughorn and think that not everybody can be brave and the fact that he had courage not to join also means a lot, but on the empathetic level I would love the character like Regulus so much. Especially since we see from Regulus' mouth now ( or from his writing) that he WAS remorseful and indeed tried to do the right thing, unlike Snape's "remorse" which I categorize for now as "maybe remorseful, maybe not". Having said that, I want to ask again, in light of HBP especially . What is the significance of both characters, who are now dead ( Dumbledore and Sirius) having brothers? Now, I understand that not everybody shares the idea that Dumbledore is dead, but for me the case is clear, so I am working on that assumption. I remember we discussed it in light of brothers being the opposites and all the mythology references, but I really doubt that this is the case now. First, JKR crossed out the possibility of Remus having a brother, where mythology wise she IMO could have explored the possibility of the "opposite twin" so more clearly,IMO. I also do not think that JKR will not make Aberworth Dumbledore a "dark" brother. If nothing else, based on her remark that the only character who we sort of meet as "new" in book 7 , will be the member of the Order, whom we know but have not really met yet or something like that. I think that she was talking about Aberworth here, personally. So, if not to show Aberworth and Regulus as complete opposites of Albus and Sirius ( imagine that this is the case), what do you think is the plot significance of them being in the picture at all? I mean, Regulus sure seems to get a nice, if secondary storyline, but in terms of him being Sirius' brother and Aberworth being Albus brother, I just don't see how important that could be, when book 7 has so much to deal with. I guess I can sort of see them offering help to Harry in his quest, sort of substituting for Sirius and Albus, but would not that be easier and less convoluted not to kill off Albus and Sirius in the first place? Thoughts? Alla From AllieS426 at aol.com Mon Jan 30 04:13:27 2006 From: AllieS426 at aol.com (allies426) Date: Mon, 30 Jan 2006 04:13:27 -0000 Subject: Hermione dead and MAJOR SPOILER to "The Sixth Sense" movie In-Reply-To: <43DD2E05.6090402@sprynet.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147270 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Bart Lidofsky wrote: > > lucianam73 wrote: > > I think there are hints. We are informed all Time-Turners have been > > destroyed, > > Bart: > I'm tired of hearing this. We know nothing of the kind. What we know > are all the Time-Turners belonging to the British Ministry of Magic have > been destroyed. In spite of its importance in the Harry Potter novels, > there has to be a lot more to the magic world than just that. > > Bart > Allie: We don't even know that. We know that the Daily Prophet - which is subject to biased journalism and political censorship - reported that the British MoM Time-Turners were destroyed. From rdoliver30 at yahoo.com Mon Jan 30 04:22:18 2006 From: rdoliver30 at yahoo.com (lupinlore) Date: Mon, 30 Jan 2006 04:22:18 -0000 Subject: VA/H=Mx13+RP? Snape's Culpability? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147271 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "justcarol67" wrote: > > > Carol, who doesn't for a moment doubt Snape's intelligence or think > he's naive but doesn't think he would or could have interpreted the > Prophecy as we do, with the benefit of hindsight and Dumbledore's > explanations, or as LV did, in a way that was neither sane nor logical > Why was Voldemort's reaction neither sane nor logical? Let's see, he's told that the one with the power to destroy him will be born as the seventh month wanes to parents who have thrice defied him. This means it can only be one of two possbilities. Why should he wait and take a risk that the potential danger will become actual? Why worry about which is which? That would have been foolish and risky in the extreme. The action he took was perfectly sane and perfectly logical. Strangle both potential dangers in their cradle (pun very much intended), making sure that you act first against the danger you think is most likely. Surely no one believes he would have allowed Neville to survive? No, after finishing Harry he would doubtless have killed Neville just to be sure. Which would have been the perfectly sane and logical, if ruthless, course of action to take. And also the perfectly predictable course of action. Anyone with even a modicum of understanding of paranoid personalities, much less with the kind of intimate awareness of Voldemort's outlook that even a novice deatheater would have had, would have clearly forseen Voldemort's perfectly sane, logical, and predictable reaction. Lupinlore From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Mon Jan 30 04:35:31 2006 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Mon, 30 Jan 2006 04:35:31 -0000 Subject: Order of Siblings (was: The ancient and most noble house of Black) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147272 Neri wrote: > Here`s what bothering me: > > Phineas is Elladora's older brother (he was born in 1847 and she in > 1850) and he's on her left ? well and good. Callidora is older than > her sister Charis (1915 vs. 1919) and she's on her left ? well and > good. But what about Belvina? She's on the left of her brother > Arcturus, but is she older than him? Her birth date isn't very clear > in the picture, but it looks to me like 1886, which would make her > *younger* than Arcturus (1884). > > The reason I'm asking is that: About two years ago I hypothesized that > the three Black cousins were born in the order Bellatrix, Andromeda, > Narcissa, because according to the description of the tree in OotP > they appear from left to right in that order. In HBP it was indeed > verified that Bella is the eldest. If we established now that JKR > adheres to the common rule of listing siblings from left to right > according to their age it would be practically established that > Andromeda is indeed the second sister and Narcissa the youngest. > However, Belvina's birth date foils this nice consistency a bit. Can > anybody please convince me it's not 1886? I offer a free bag of ACID POPS as a prize. Carol responds: Hi, Neri. No ACID POPS, thanks. (I have my own theories about what happened at "Spinner's End" as you may be aware, and they don't involve the DADA curse, not Snape in love with Narcissa.) I think Krista7 has answered your question perfectly, but I want to add one more little thing. JKR's version of the family tree is probably a draft and incomplete (I doubt that the version in 12 GP said "1s, 1d": it would have given the names of the Black descendants). She probably hasn't worked out all the details, either. For example, there's probably an Ollivander connection somewhere, but maybe it's too distant to appear on the part that she's worked out. Also, JKR is apparetnly using a vertical sheet of paper (like a standard sheet of typing paper) whereas I've always pictured the tapestry as horizontal, running the length of the hallway. Otherwise, the names at the beginning would be near the ceiling and impossible to read. (A horizontal orientation would allow the names to be presented in their proper order, with Belvina, like Bellatrix and her sisters, in her proper place.) Besides, the tapestry, unlike JKR's handwritten version, was created magically, so it would nicely arrange itself! (Trying to make it fit our Muggle ideas of what's possible is rather like trying to figure out how the Marauder's Map can show all the floors of Hogwarts and all the inhabitants at once and yet allow Harry to see a particular name in a particular place at a glance.) Re the Potters, mentioned by others in this thread: I think that Charlus Potter and his wife are too young to be James Potter's parents, who died of old age per JKR's website (How could a witch die of old age at 57 when DD is over 150?), but I'm wondering if the "s" and "d" under Callidora and Harfang Longbottom might be Neville's Great Uncle Algie and his "gran," Augusta. They could have been born in the 1930s. Not all *that* old by wizarding standards, though, so probably not, unless the "old" used to describe them reflects Harry's perspective. Maybe Harfang is Augusta and Algie's cousin (or a deceased brother) rather than their father. (?) The point is probably to show the interconnectedness of the families rather than the specific family members. And did you note the Yaxley connection? Isn't Yaxley the brutal-faced Death Eater? Interesting that a Yaxley got burned off the chart! Anyway, to return to your question, I think that in the tapestry in the hallway of 12 GP, the names would be arranged with the oldest on the left and the youngest on the right, but that JKR was unable to duplicate that arrangement (or was more concerned with showing relationships and intermarriages than birth order) in the draft version that she's teasing us with in the photograph. Carol, just tossing out possibilities she hopes are helpful From fuzz876i at yahoo.com Mon Jan 30 04:52:46 2006 From: fuzz876i at yahoo.com (fuzz876i) Date: Mon, 30 Jan 2006 04:52:46 -0000 Subject: The importance of death /Harry and Cedric In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147273 Lupinlore: > > Cedric is not suffering at all. > > Alla: > > Let's put it this way - because of Peter > Cedric lost everything - good and bad things that life may offer, > while Harry suffered a lot from Snape, > > So, while I probably agree with you that Harry's suffering may be > greater, Cedric lost so much more than Harry's. < BIG SNIP> > Sorry, disagree again - Harry does not forget about Sirius at all > and as I wrote in the past me being a Sirius fan and all, I would > have been upset if he did. Harry does not go in CAPSLOCK mode in his > grief, true, but all people grief differently. Harry is a subtle > griever, IMO. I loved how JKR handled it, absolutely did. Fuzz wrote: With the death of Cedric as well as Sirius Harry suffers and shows classic signs of survivor's guilt. By blaming himself for both deaths Harry is saying that it should have been him that died both times. In Cedric's death Harry thouhgt if he had not told Cedric to take the cup with him then he would still be alive. In Sirius's death Harry had been dueling with Bellatrix and thought if he had finished her off then Sirius would not have died. But as to who suffered more Harry is still suffering and Cedric's are over. Fuzz. From catlady at wicca.net Mon Jan 30 05:07:09 2006 From: catlady at wicca.net (Catlady (Rita Prince Winston)) Date: Mon, 30 Jan 2006 05:07:09 -0000 Subject: Spiders / Tom Jr/ Rookwood/ Snape's secret/ Potters' protection/ Werewolves Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147274 Geoff wrote in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/146916 : << As young children themselves,they traumatised Ron by transforming his teddy into a spider and creating the deep-rooted arachnophobia which surfaces in the books from time to time. >> Surely the teddy bear/spider incident was an act of childhood unintended magic, like Harry finding himself suddenly on the roof when having been pursued by bullies, or turning his teacher's wig blue. As in Rowling's response to the Rumor that "Harry is a Metamorphmagus": << Anyway: before they have received training, very young witches and wizards are prone to unstable surges of power, often accidentally producing effects that they may have to train for a few years to be able to reproduce deliberately. Their magical ability is bottled up for weeks at a time and then, when made angry or frightened, it simply explodes out of them, sometimes (as in the case of the vanishing glass in the chapter of the same name, 'Philosopher's Stone) causing at least as much inconvenience to themselves as others. >> Fuzz876i wrote in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/147010 : << She used either a love potion or some incantation to dupe Tom Riddle Sr into marrying her. By doing this she insured that her children would not face the insanities of her family. >> I dunno -- Diary!Tom seemed sufficiently insane to me. Andie wrote in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/147118 : << if she only asked she would not have been left alone, Tom wouldn't have grown up in a muggle orphanage, he wouldn't have turned rotten, he wouldn't have become LV and we wouldn't have a story. >> Oh, I'm sure Tom could have turned rotten without a muggle orphanage. If there were such a thing as a wizarding orphanage, the staff there would have known how to keep him from victimising the other children, but they would also have known to tell him that he had inherited Gaunt bad blood or that he was a mere Halfblood. exodusts wrote in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/147048 : << Carol Rookwood, (snip) Is it a coincidence J.K. was finishing GoF that year, and a Death Eater appears with the surname Rookwood, which is pretty unusual? >> I think someone posted years ago that Rookwood was the name of one of Guy Fawkes's co-conspirators, and perhaps came to JKR's mind when she was writing about Fawkes the phoenix. maria8162001 wrote in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/147133 : << I've also read Mr. Rickman's (Snape) interview and he said also that there is more to Snape than what you see or how he look, something like that. >> My recollection is that when the first Potter movie was cast, JKR told a secret to Rickman and a secret to Coltrane, something she didn't tell even the director, something they needed to know to play their characters. There was a lot of speculation at the time of what these secrets might be -- maybe that Hagrid was going to die in the then-upcoming fourth book, maybe why Dumbledore trusted Snape so much. It occured to me recently that both secrets may have been revealed in GoF -- Hagrid's secret that he is half-giant, Snape's secret that he is a branded Death Eater. Tanya wrote in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/147143 : << I have always wondered what the Potters were doing for protection before they cast the secret keeper spell a week before the attack. >> When Harry was born, his parents were either in hiding or about to go into hiding (from two different JKR interviews about why Harry doesn't have a godmother), which may mean they had already survived an attack or that one of DD's spies had warned him that LV was targetting them (or just that they were doing important secret work and didn't want to be interrupted). LV's attempts to find them may have included capturing and torturing, Imperius'ing, Legilimens'ing, or Veritaserum'ing people who seemed likely to know something about the hiding. LV may have gotten 'warm' a couple of times, forcing them to change their hiding place. Once he had Peter (or Remus) under sufficient control, he may have found out about the new hiding place while they were still moving in. It may have been this history of LV coming closer and closer that led DD to suggest using Fidelius. The two quotes: http://www.jkrowling.com/textonly/en/news_view.cfm?id=80 Q: Does Harry have a godmother? If so, will she make an appearance in future books? JKR: No, he doesn't. I have thought this through. If Sirius had married Sirius was too busy being a big rebel to get married. When Harry was born, it was at the very height of Voldemort fever last time so his christening was a very hurried, quiet affair with just Sirius, just the best friend. At that point it looked as if the Potters would have to go into hiding so obviously they could not do the big christening thing and invite lots of people. Sirius is the only one, unfortunately. I have got to be careful what I say there, haven't I? http://www.quick-quote-quill.org/articles/2005/0705-tlc_mugglenet-anelli-3.htm ES: Who is Harry's godmother? JKR: Didn't have one. ES: Really? JKR: Well, Sirius never had time to get a girlfriend, let alone marry. ES: They could have just picked some other close friend of the family. JKR: At the time that they christened Harry, they were in hiding. This was not going to be a widely attended christening, because he was already in danger. So this is something they were going to do very quietly, with as few people as possible, that they wanted to make this commitment with Sirius. And ? yeah. Can't say much more. Miles wrote in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/147207 : << To activate the ancient magic that protects Harry until his 17th birthday he needs to be "at home" in a house that is owned by a blood-relative of his MOTHER. It was Lily's sacrifice that protected Harry, and Lily is muggleborn. So the safe place for Harry could not be a wizard's family, because Harry's magical relatives are all from his father's side. >> Yes, but if McGonagall knew that Harry had wizarding relatives, why didn't she argue with DD's statement that the Dursleys 'are the only family he has left'? Christina wrote in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/147249 : << If the werewolves are forced to steal and kill to eat, it is because they chose to. Lupin says that they have "*shunned* normal society," implying a conscious choice. >> I don't think that's *entirely* fair. Lupin, in PoA: "We gave me a job when I have been shunned all my adult life, unable to find paid work because of what I am." We even got to see an example of the shunning, when Ron, who had known Lupin for a year, yelled 'Get away from me, werewolf!' when he first learned of Lupin's condition. People who can't find paid work and have been (unlike Lupin) cast off by their families, have to get food, or money for food, in unconventional ways, such as stealing or begging. Some of the hunting and fishing can be legal, altho' I've heard a fair bit about shooting deer outside the legal season and catching fish on someone else's privately owned land from people who needed to feed their families. So, if they have no money to pay rent, and no one would rent to them anyway, doesn't it make sense for them to camp in as close to wilderness as they can find rather than on the city streets? From fuzz876i at yahoo.com Mon Jan 30 04:57:21 2006 From: fuzz876i at yahoo.com (fuzz876i) Date: Mon, 30 Jan 2006 04:57:21 -0000 Subject: special treatment of Malfoy In-Reply-To: <012601c62534$6a2207a0$2f60400c@Spot> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147275 > Fuzz876i > There were two people that would actually dare > > to punish Malfoy and one of them was not actually who he said he was > > and the other is Professor Mcgonagell. > > Magpie: What's even more extreme is > Snape's *unfair* treatment of Harry, whom he personally dislikes more than > any other student. > > Other teachers treat Malfoy like any other student. McGonagall, Fake!Moody, > Hagrid and Filch are all shown treating him like a student in need of > discipline. > > Yes that may seem like it would be the case but Snape's hatred of Harry is a carry over from Snape's school days with James Harry's father. Is it right to just discipline Harry and Ron in this case or should all involved received detention? I am not saying that it is wrong for other professors to treat Malfoy as a student and discipline him when it is needed. What I am saying is this the punishment should be fair and precise and not based on what one student says as it was in this case. Malfoy said that Harry tried to curse him when the truth was that they had actually tried to curse each other at the same time. When Harry and Ron tried to explain this to Snape they both received detention and Malfoy got nothing. In The Prisoner of Azkaban Malfoy walked into class late after going to the hospital wing and being treated for the wound from Buckbeak and all Snape said at that time was to settle down if that had been Harry or Ron it would have been detention or 50 points a piece from Gryfendor. Is it really fair to show this much favoritism to one student? In my opinion I think not if you punish one all should be punished as it would seem in this case. Fuzz876i From bartl at sprynet.com Mon Jan 30 05:23:32 2006 From: bartl at sprynet.com (Bart Lidofsky) Date: Mon, 30 Jan 2006 00:23:32 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Will there be an ESE!character in Book 7? In-Reply-To: <20060128182050.85485.qmail@web53107.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20060128182050.85485.qmail@web53107.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <43DDA2D4.3060005@sprynet.com> No: HPFGUIDX 147276 Magda Grantwich wrote: > Yes, I assume that Harry will undergo a personal betrayal in Book 7, > from someone close to him that he's trusted in the past. Bart: It's probably going to be Neville. No overweight person can be entirely good, in JKR's world. Bart From katmac at katmac.cncdsl.com Mon Jan 30 05:39:10 2006 From: katmac at katmac.cncdsl.com (lagattalucianese) Date: Mon, 30 Jan 2006 05:39:10 -0000 Subject: Thestrals be the key / Owls In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147277 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "mmmwintersteiger" wrote: > > > > Caro: > > > > the thestrals may be a way for Harry to get hold of > > > > the horcruxes left. They can find any Place, even if you > > > > Don't know where it is. > > Come on now guys, if Horcruxes were that easy to find they wouldn't > be very safe, now would they? > > michelle > Unless, of course, Harry employed one particular thestral. Perhaps the one Dumbledore rides when he doesn't care to Apparate? (What better way to get eyes and ears on the scene without arousing suspicion...) A thestral who is visible to people who haven't experienced a death. Or, to put a *really* interesting spin on things, a thestral who is visible *only* to people who *haven't* experienced a death (*that* would fix a Death Eater or three!). A thestral who knows almost as much about Horcruxes as Dumbledore does, because when he isn't flapping around like an overgrown bat, he devotes himself to teaching Defense Against the Dark Arts, and planning the Order's defense... From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Mon Jan 30 06:12:42 2006 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Mon, 30 Jan 2006 06:12:42 -0000 Subject: VA/H=Mx13+RP? Snape's Culpability? In-Reply-To: <01a301c6248f$01f34040$6180400c@Spot> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147278 Alla wrote: > > > On that I disagree completely. I did say yesterday that sure Peter is much guiltier in Potters deaths if Snape tried to do the right thing, but without Snape's doing his deed, Peter may not have NEEDED to do that choice, ever, so in my book it can NEVER be evaluated completely separate from what Snape did. IMO they tied together and it just cannot be undone. Carol responds: By your logic, Snape is guilty of almost everything that happens in the book. If he hadn't revealed the Prophecy to Voldemort, PP wouldn't have betrayed the Potters, true. But he (Pettigrew) also would not have killed the Twelve Muggles, framed Sirius Black, gone into hiding, escaped and returned to Voldemort (who wouldn't have been vaporized if he hadn't acted on the Prophecy), helped kidnap Harry, murdered Cedric, and resurrected Voldemort. It's quite true that those things would not have happened if Snape hadn't revealed the Prophecy to Voldemort and *Voldemort* hadn't chosen to act on it and got himself vaporized at Godric's Hollow, but surely Voldemort and Pettigrew are responsible for their own choices and actions just as Snape was responsible for his? Surely we can't say that Snape is indirectly responsible for Cedric's murder, for example, because everything goes back to his one mistake in revealing the Prophecy. Surely Wormtail's decision to betray the Potters is as much his own decision as his choice to resurrect Voldemort, and he, Wormtail, is solely responsible for those choices. Harry blames himself for Wormtail's escape and Dumbledore tells us that actions have unforeseeable consequences for which the doer of the action (in Harry's case, saving Wormtail's life) is not responsible. If we look at the consequences of Snape's revelation of the Prophecy, we also see the vaporization of Voldemort and eleven years (or more) of peace in the WW because Voldie has been vaporized. Shall we give Snape credit for that, and for making possible the existence of the Prophecy Boy whom Voldemort has marked as his equal and who is the WW's only hope to defeat the Dark Lord? If it hadn't been for Snape, there would be no Chosen One. Or, on a simpler level, if it hadn't been for Snape's lesson on bezoars and/or his notes in his Potions book, Harry would not have known about bezoars and Ron would have died. So Snape is responsible for saving Ron's life. Actions have consequences, most of them unforeseen, in RL and in the Potterverse. If it hadn't been for Snape's (or someone's) revelation of the Prophecy to Voldemort, there would be no Godric's Hollow, no Chosen One, no story. But surely a person can't be held to account for the actions of others even if those actions made his own actions possible. Are the Marauders responsible for the murder of Barty Crouch Sr. because they made the map that Barty Jr. used to commit that murder? Are the Weasley Twins partly responsible for the death of Dumbledore because Draco used Peruvian Darkness powder from their shop to let the DEs into the school? Snape has his own sins and errors to account for, beginning with joining the Death Eaters in the first place. To hold him accountable for Peter's sins and errors as well is surely unfair and unrealistic. "It is our choices that reveal who we truly are" is one thing. "It is the choices we make because other people made those choices possible that reveal who *they* truly are" is quite another. Regardless of whether Snape's remorse is genuine, and we all know that you don't believe it is, the choices that *Pettigrew* made are Pettigrew's choices, whether or not Snape's revelation of the Prophecy made them possible, and Pettigrew alone is responsible for them. Pettigrew *knew* that he was betraying his friends to their deaths. He could have stopped the chain of events that began with the revelation of the Prophecy by keeping the Potters' secret as he had been entrusted to do. That he failed to do so, that he chose his own life over theirs, is in no way attributable to Snape. You might as well blame Sirius Black since without his idea of changing Secret Keepers, Pettigrew's betrayal would not have been possible. But neither Snape nor Black betrayed the Potters. It was Pettigrew's doing, and his alone. Carol, thinking that this fourth post must be Alla's fault since I would NEVER have NEEDED to do it if she hadn't blamed Snape for Peter's choices P.S. No Howlers, please! I didn't post at all yesterday, and it's almost tomorrow. From juli17 at aol.com Mon Jan 30 06:32:19 2006 From: juli17 at aol.com (juli17ptf) Date: Mon, 30 Jan 2006 06:32:19 -0000 Subject: JKR's secrets about Snape and Hagrid (was:.../Snape's secret/etc...) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147279 maria8162001 wrote in > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/147133 : > > << I've also read Mr. Rickman's (Snape) interview and he said also > that there is more to Snape than what you see or how he look, > something like that. >> Catlady wrote: > > My recollection is that when the first Potter movie was cast, JKR told > a secret to Rickman and a secret to Coltrane, something she didn't > tell even the director, something they needed to know to play their > characters. There was a lot of speculation at the time of what these > secrets might be -- maybe that Hagrid was going to die in the > then-upcoming fourth book, maybe why Dumbledore trusted Snape so much. > It occured to me recently that both secrets may have been revealed in > GoF -- Hagrid's secret that he is half-giant, Snape's secret that he > is a branded Death Eater. > Julie now: GoF did reveal both secrets, but I don't think either of the above are the "secrets" JKR revealed to Rickman and Coltrane. Particularly in Coltrane's case, why would he need to know Hagrid's a half-giant? This knowledge wouldn't change his performance or interpretation of the character in any appreciable way I can think of--big, big man, or giant, it's pretty much the same as far as Hagrid's nature (unless of course he's been emotionally affected by his half-giant heritage in ways we can't yet imagine--for instance he going to become ESE!Hagrid- -er, NOT!). I suppose she could have revealed to Rickman that Snape was a DE, but then added that he is a reformed DE--or--maybe he's just pretending to be reformed, or he's willing to take whichever side will most benefit him, etc. Snape's such a deliberately ambiguous character that I'm not sure how it would be beneficial to reveal what he appears to be at any point throughout the books EXCEPT at the end. That's the only way Rickman would know to play Snape either as essentially "Good" (on the side of DD/Order) or "Evil" (on Voldemort's side or on with an agenda to become the next Dark Lord) throughout the movies. I do think whatever JKR revealed must have had a bit of bang, enough so it would affect both Rickman's and Coltrane's portrayals of their characters even in the early films. I also suspect that the two secrets are related, i.e., that Snape and Hagrid both know something or have some sort of connection that we haven't yet learned, which almost certainly pertains to Harry. And which will also explain their mutual tolerance and acceptance (even support, in Hagrid's case) of each other, when they couldn't be two more different people. Julie From bboyminn at yahoo.com Mon Jan 30 08:56:28 2006 From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Mon, 30 Jan 2006 08:56:28 -0000 Subject: VA/H=Mx13+RP? Snape's Culpability? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147280 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "dumbledore11214" wrote: > > > Carol responds: > > Think about how long it takes to run (or be thrown downstairs) > > and to Apparate. That's how long young Snape would have had to > > think about the Prophecy. Possibly he didn't even think about > > the meaning and implication of the words until he was reciting > > them. > > > Alla: > > Thanks for the explanation, but I sincerely think that your > explanation is not supported by the canon we have at all. IMO > of course. Yes, you said at the end that you don't think that > Snape is stupid, but from the picture you portrayed I see not > just stupid, but idiotic Snape. He did not realise the meaning > of the words? Erm... does he have sufficient knowledge of > English? The Prophecy is ambigious, it is not that ambigious > that anybody could not decipher that the one with the Power to > destroy Dark Lord approaches, IMO. > > ...edited... > > Alla, bboyminn: Sorry Alla, but I think you think what you think because the books have told you to think that. We have Dumbledore's explanation of Voldemort's interpretation of the Prophecy, and Dumbledore to some extent had based his own interpretation on things that have happened after the fact. But we must look at what Snape new in the moment. He does not have the benefit of history to look back on when trying to understand a few vague sentences. You said - "...it is not that ambigious that anybody could not decipher that the one with the Power to destroy Dark Lord approaches, IMO." But it is that ambiguous. I will admit that the word 'born' is used a couple times in the Prophecy, but again, it is only after the fact that we can take that literally. The Prophecy says that - "The one with the power to vanquish the Dark Lord approaches . . . born to those who have thrice defied him, born as the seventh month dies..." We know the one is approaching. We know his or her parents have defied Voldemort three times. We know he/she was born in July. Approaching could mean taveling. Defied doesn't mean defeat or elude; it simply means to oppose. Yes, born as the seventh month dies, but in what year? Does it mean 'will be born' or does it mean 'was born'? So, I contend that the Prophecy could just as easily refer to a snooty waiter in Paris, who three times ignored Voldemort's call for service, and later gave birth to a son who is now slowly traveling from Paris to London (or Hogwarts). Again, you think you know the proper interpretation of the Prophecy because Dumbledore explained it all to you, but if you look at it objectively, there is virtually no way to know it refers to the Potters and there about-to-be-born son. In the few minute, or at best couple of distracted hours, before Snape reached Voldemort, I really don't think he could have worked out the interpretation that Voldemort eventually arrived at. The truth is, we don't even know if Voldemort got it right. He simply decided what it meant, then acted as if his analysis was true thereby making it true. I still say, that from Snape's perspective, in that moment, the son of a snooty Paris waiter makes just as much sense as anything else. To the original part of this discussion, I don't see how anyone can compare Snape's general transfer of information which was highly subject to interpretation to the blantant willful unconscionable betrayal of his close friends that Peter commited. Once again, just trying to add some perspective. Steve/bboyminn From rdoliver30 at yahoo.com Mon Jan 30 04:06:23 2006 From: rdoliver30 at yahoo.com (lupinlore) Date: Mon, 30 Jan 2006 04:06:23 -0000 Subject: The importance of death /Harry and Cedric In-Reply-To: <5693AA10-912C-11DA-BADE-000393B04DDE@alltel.net> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147281 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Karen Chuplis wrote: > > Grief and Harry is a much more private thing. He has always fought > against a show of grief (it seems to me) in overt ways. It is more like > it is something SO big, he has no way to express it in words, so he > shuts down. I felt this was all very clear in JKR's writings. To me it was as clear as a pond full of mud with an oil slick on top of it. CEDRIC causes such an explosion and Sirius doesn't? Sorry, don't buy it. And I especially don't buy it because of, of all beings, Kreacher. At the end of OOTP Harry is, quite rightly, full of murderous fury toward Kreacher. Then he becomes Kreacher's master scarcely three weeks later and his response is "Uhhh, okay?" Sorry, that isn't private. That's catatonic. Lupinlore From mauranen at yahoo.com Mon Jan 30 10:15:28 2006 From: mauranen at yahoo.com (jekatiska) Date: Mon, 30 Jan 2006 10:15:28 -0000 Subject: =?iso-8859-1?q?Re:_Lord_Voldemort's_Six_Horcruxes=3F_Are_Dumbledore=92s_Opinions_Wrong=3F_(LVs_SHADOW?= In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147282 > Brothergib wrote: > > > Interesting, but Voldemort is not snakelike when he reemerges > from > > > his long 'exile' when he conversed with 'the very worst of our > kind'. > Carol: > *(snip)* > > I think he must have been snakelike (as the result of Nagini as > > Horcrux) before Godric's Hollow for two reasons. First, the DEs in > the > > graveyard scene don't react at all to his appearance. This is > > Voldemort restored, Voldemort as they knew him. And second, the face > > that appears out of Quirrell's head in SS/PS is snakelike. At that > > point, Quirrell is drinking unicorn blood to sustain his master, but > > snake venom only comes into the picture when its used to create his > > fetal body and provide "milk" for baby!mort. > > Ceridwen: > I think that, as LV split his soul and removed the pieces, he became > a bit less human each time. He was born with one quality of snakes: > Parseltongue. So as he becomes less human, he becomes more > snakelike. I think that, if he became an Animagus, he would become a > snake; and his Patronus is probably a snake (or a basilisk or other > serpentine creature), IMO. Snakelike properties might even be a > Slytherin family trait. > I agree with Ceridwen: it's not the horcrux that makes him snakelike, but his inborn snakelike qualities. I would also suggest that having possessed the bodies of *snakes* for years, not having his own, must have left some marks on him. Jekatiska From MadameSSnape at aol.com Mon Jan 30 10:18:07 2006 From: MadameSSnape at aol.com (MadameSSnape at aol.com) Date: Mon, 30 Jan 2006 05:18:07 EST Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: VA/H=Mx13+RP? Snape's Culpability? Message-ID: <2ba.3ae59df.310f41df@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 147283 In a message dated 1/30/2006 4:02:55 AM Eastern Standard Time, bboyminn at yahoo.com writes: I still say, that from Snape's perspective, in that moment, the son of a snooty Paris waiter makes just as much sense as anything else. ------------------------------ Sherrie here: Why the SON of a waiter? The part of the prophecy that Snape heard, IIRC (I don't have that book to hand) isn't gender-specific - it could just as easily have applied to a daughter as a son of that snooty waiter. Maybe Voldemort did get it wrong - maybe the one with the power to vanquish him is really Lavender Brown, and Harry is really the ultimate red herring. Sherrie [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From c.john at imperial.ac.uk Mon Jan 30 10:15:43 2006 From: c.john at imperial.ac.uk (esmith222002) Date: Mon, 30 Jan 2006 10:15:43 -0000 Subject: =?iso-8859-1?q?Re:_Lord_Voldemort's_Six_Horcruxes=3F_Are_Dumbledore=92s_Opinions_Wrong=3F_(LVs_SHADOW?= In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147284 > Carol: > I agree that LV had not yet made Nagini into a Horcrux when he had the > DADA interview. But are you sure that he was actually recruiting > followers other than his few old friends at that point? Maybe he still > had some traveling to do--and some Horcruxes to make. I think the fact that he wanted the DADA position suggests that he had finished with his travelling. I always assumed that the 'travelling' was how he learned to create Horcruxes - clearly not something he could learn in books. > And he couldhave made Nagini a Horcrux at any time between that interview and > Godric's Hollow. He could easily have had the fifth (Ravenclaw) > Horcrux as well, with Nagini as the sixth. (I think it's that small > point on which DD is wrong; he thinks that Nagini was made into a > Horcrux after Voldemort's body was restored, but I think it had to be sooner.) Yes, we seem to completely agree on this point (see the initial post). With the exception that I don't think any item of Ravenclaw's can be found. Therefore Nagini, IMO, was Horcrux 5. > > You say that he wasn't snakelike when he returned from his travels, > but you're assuming that his travels were over when he had the DADA > interview. But do we know when that interview occurred? How long or > short a time passed between that interview and the beginning of VW1? > Even if that interview (when his features were blurred and he had > created at least four Horcruxes) occurred immediately before VW1 > began, he still had eleven years to go before Godric's Hollow-- plenty of time for more murders and more Horcruxes. I think that Voldemort knew the sword was at Hogwarts and was willing to be incredibly patient in his quest to obtain it to convert to a Horcrux. I think LV regarded himself as invincible, and it wasn't until the prophecy was made that LV got stressed and felt vulnerable and quickly made Nagini a Horcrux, which allowed him to use Harry's death for the last Horcrux. Brothergib From katmac at katmac.cncdsl.com Mon Jan 30 10:05:25 2006 From: katmac at katmac.cncdsl.com (lagattalucianese) Date: Mon, 30 Jan 2006 10:05:25 -0000 Subject: back to Blacks was Re: Snape and DD In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147285 > > Potioncat: > > But, the senior Mrs. Potter is a Black, not a Prince. So she isn't > Eileen's sister. > ... > > Potioncat (recovering from a new job and a cold) > La Gatta Lucianese: Gesundheit. Canon, please? I just checked out Mr. and Mrs. Potter in the HPL, and nowhere does it say boo about Mrs. Potter's maiden name. Or Mr. Potter's first name. Under the Black family tree ( http://www.hp- lexicon.org/wizards/blackfamilytree.html ), there's a Dorea Black who married a Charles Potter and produced a single son, but since she was 57 at the time of her death, hardly "elderly, even by wizarding standards" (TLC), she is probably not James' mother. I believe it was the Weasleys that had relatively close ties to the Blacks in canon. From brahadambal at indiatimes.com Mon Jan 30 03:50:21 2006 From: brahadambal at indiatimes.com (latha279) Date: Mon, 30 Jan 2006 03:50:21 -0000 Subject: VA/H=Mx13+RP? Snape's Culpability? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147286 bboyminn: > Excellent post by Brady. He agrees with me, so, of course it's > excellent (humor). > > I'm not trying to counter anything that Brady said, I'm just going > to expand on some aspects of the prophecy. > But, again, comparing Snape's action specifically to Petigrew's, I > don't see how any can fail to see the difference between them. > Snape was doing his nasty job unaware of the nature of > the /specific/ consequences. Wormtail/Petigrew on the other hand > betrayed his best and probably only friends because he was a > coward. He sold the Potters to Voldemort like a sack of cheap > potatoes, and has shown no remorse for his actions. Snape and > Dumbledore, on the other hand, claim that Snape is deeply > remorseful of the consequence of his actions. > > Big difference as far as I'm concerned. brady: :) Thanks Steve. But I wanted to put one thing very straight -- I am a girl :)). I agree it is very very difficult to know that from my name. I haven't had a more hearty laugh first thing in office on monday morning ever before. Thanks so much. And yes, coming back to the interpretation again, apart from the fact that there is no way to determine who the person would be (whether already born, marked or anything) there was also no way Snape would know HOW exactly and WHEN exactly LV would react to the news. LV may just have sat with the news for a 100 years for all we know, just to make sure he gets his real enemy (so-the-prophesy- says). Or he may just have relied on his horcruxes more and said "I am invincible. Let whoever *approach*. I don't care". Snape, however, is definitely nasty. The whole act of DEs is nasty and there is no justification/redemption whatsoever for all those sins. But, comparing that to PP's act of betrayal, Snape is definitely better than PP. Why would DE!Snape wait till HP be born? He would have murdered Sirius and James the day he learnt the AV curse. Right? If he has ever hated anyone in life, it was definitely these two. Now, why didn't he do that? The Potters sought a secret-keeper on DD's warning/planning AND only after the prophesy was made. But Snape has held a grudge for a long time against James and Sirius. So why has he never tried to kill them before? Even a DE Snape didn't think of doing that. Snape did not need a reason to kill after he became a DE. He could have gone and killed them for his own desire. Yet, he didn't do it. But, Peter was just the opposite. At the very first opportunity, he gave up his friends. Who needs enemies if you have people like Peter for friends!! I will still stick to the line that Snape is maybe 0.1% guilty for the Potters death, but Peter is 100% guilty for the same. and there I think is your gradation. A 1000 times difference in percentage of guilt. You can make whatever you want out of that. JMHO, brady. From lucianam73 at yahoo.com.br Mon Jan 30 11:34:32 2006 From: lucianam73 at yahoo.com.br (lucianam73) Date: Mon, 30 Jan 2006 11:34:32 -0000 Subject: The Ancient and Most Noble House of Black/Time Turners was: Hermione Dead In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147287 > mrsewp wrote: > > > Not only is a Longbottom on the Black Family Tree but a Charlus > Potter... is this the true reason why Harry was so easily able to > inherit #12 Grimmauld Place? Sirius, though clever, might not have > been able to get past his father's spellwork. lucianam: 'Black family tradition decreed that the house was handed down the direct line, to the next male with the name of Black.' As far as I understand, `direct line' in this context here means `from Black son to Black son'. On the opposite, when a Black daughter is born, the direct line is cut. That means Harry cannot be a Black heir: Dorea Black is daughter to one of Phineas Nigellus's sons (we don't know his name), therefore the line was `cut' when she was born. Her children will be Potters, not Blacks, and certainly won't be considered heirs. Neville's and Draco's family tree situations are similar, both having Black blood (not Black inheritance line!) from their mothers' sides. Of course, Draco's mother being a Black herself, he could claim to be `closer' to the inheritnce line, but still not having a right to it, according to Black family tradition. Bellatrix is the eldest sister, allright, but she's still a female and therefore not an heir according to the `direct line' rule, which required a male child. The only `advantage' she has over Draco, for example, is that she is a Black, an even that is questionable since she's married and her name is Lestrange since. Since there is not a rightful heir anymore, I think Dumbledore was quite right to trust Sirius's will, aka the last heir's will. I can't see how this family tree drawing could change anything in terms of who inherits 12 Grimmauld Place I'll stick to the `Who's the other Metamorphamagus?' question. I used to think it could be Ginny or Narcissa, but now it can even be Harry or Neville, as well. Oh and does anybody remember if Harry gave Kreacher any orders before HBP? I don't think he has. Lucianam lucianam73 wrote: > > I think there are hints. We are informed all Time-Turners have been > > destroyed, > > Bart: (snipped) > I'm tired of hearing this. We know nothing of the kind. What we know > are all the Time-Turners belonging to the British Ministry of Magic > have been destroyed. > Allie: > We don't even know that. We know that the Daily Prophet - which is > subject to biased journalism and political censorship - reported that > the British MoM Time-Turners were destroyed. lucianam: Thanks for canon-correcting me. The point is, whether there are Time-Turners left or not, the general idea_ which may prove false in Book 7 as you have pointed out_ is that they have been destroyed. And that makes the reader think, `Oh Dear, well no more Time-Travelling in Book 7 then!'. And of course that is the purpose of mentioning Time-Turners being destroyed (IMHO), to get the reader off his guard and then throw a good two chapters of Time Travelling in the next book! As I said I'm putting my bets on Ron's watch anyway. And I'd also put good money on its being the exact same watch Dumbledore had in the first chapter of Harry Potter and the PS/SS, only before he died Dumbledore's already set it. That's why it looks a bit different now, where the symbols are concerned. Lucianam From ceridwennight at hotmail.com Mon Jan 30 11:34:20 2006 From: ceridwennight at hotmail.com (Ceridwen) Date: Mon, 30 Jan 2006 11:34:20 -0000 Subject: VA/H=Mx13+RP? Snape's Culpability? In-Reply-To: <2ba.3ae59df.310f41df@aol.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147288 Sherrie: > Why the SON of a waiter? The part of the prophecy that Snape heard, IIRC (I > don't have that book to hand) isn't gender-specific - it could just as > easily have applied to a daughter as a son of that snooty waiter. Maybe Voldemort > did get it wrong - maybe the one with the power to vanquish him is really > Lavender Brown, and Harry is really the ultimate red herring. Ceridwen: Love it! Harry, the ultimate Red Herring. If the prophecy child was a female, though, I would plump for Susan Bones. LV has killed some members of her family already, presumably they too have defied him. I was wondering why everyone, not just LV, thought the prophecy child was a boy. Even Dumbledore thought so. Then I remembered, the prophecy specifically gives the child a gender: "And the Dark Lord will mark *him* as his equal, but *he* will have power the Dark Lord knows not..." http://www.hp- lexicon.org/wizards/voldemort.html So, while Lavender or Susan would be a real kicker for the prophecy child, the prophecy itself specifies a boy. Too bad! I sort-of like RedHerring!Harry. Ceridwen. From elfundeb at gmail.com Mon Jan 30 11:56:13 2006 From: elfundeb at gmail.com (elfundeb) Date: Mon, 30 Jan 2006 06:56:13 -0500 Subject: =?WINDOWS-1252?Q?Re:_[HPforGrownups]_Re:_Lord_Voldemort's_Six_Horcr?= =?WINDOWS-1252?Q?uxes=3F_Are_Dumbledore=92s_Opinions_Wrong=3F_(LVs_SHADOW?= In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <80f25c3a0601300356u11b0cc7as59d5c4a2ebf80ab3@mail.gmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 147289 Once again, replying to an old post -- Carol: I agree that LV had not yet made Nagini into a Horcrux when he had the DADA interview. But are you sure that he was actually recruiting followers other than his few old friends at that point? Maybe he still had some traveling to do--and some Horcruxes to make. And he could have made Nagini a Horcrux at any time between that interview and Godric's Hollow. He could easily have had the fifth (Ravenclaw) Horcrux as well, with Nagini as the sixth. (I think it's that small point on which DD is wrong; he thinks that Nagini was made into a Horcrux after Voldemort's body was restored, but I thinkit had to be sooner.) You say that he wasn't snakelike when he returned from his travels, but you're assuming that his travels were over when he had the DADA interview. But do we know when that interview occurred? How long or short a time passed between that interview and the beginning of VW1? Even if that interview (when his features were blurred and he had created at least four Horcruxes) occurred immediately before VW1 began, he still had eleven years to go before Godric's Hollow--plenty of time for more murders and more Horcruxes. I think he must have been snakelike (as the result of Nagini as Horcrux) before Godric's Hollow for two reasons. First, the DEs in the graveyard scene don't react at all to his appearance. This is Voldemort restored, Voldemort as they knew him. And second, the face that appears out of Quirrell's head in SS/PS is snakelike. At that point, Quirrell is drinking unicorn blood to sustain his master, but snake venom only comes into the picture when its used to create his fetal body and provide "milk" for baby!mort. As I said in an earlier thread, she must already have been a Horcrux when Pettigrew found him if he could use her venom to restore Voldemort's body. And Voldie was in no shape to create a Horcrux himself between his vaporization and PP's finding him in Albania (including the interval in Quirrell's head). He didn't even have a wand, and a wand is required to create a Horcrux. So, IMO, it had to have happened before Godric's Hollow. Carol, not sure that she's arguing clearly here, but sure that Nagini was a Horcrux *before* Godric's Hollow Debbie: I think your surmise is entirely possible (as is Ceridwen's suggestion that his inner snake comes to the fore as he rips away increasing portions of his humanity in the creation of the horcruxes). But I have some alternatives . . . . I still have my doubts as to why Nagini would be a Horcrux at all. Dumbledore's own explanation doesn't add up, for one thing. Dumbledore's suggestion that Nagini is a Horcrux is clearly only a surmise. He has no real evidence to support it except for his comment that Voldemort has an unusual degree of control over her, even for a Parselmouth. Also, Dumbledore says that Voldemort no longer feels those parts of himself that he has detached through the making of horcruxes, and that he didn't notice the death of the diary horcrux. So Voldemort's control over (and fondness for) Nagini is not explained by her being a horcrux. Nor would it be explained by possession (except for the one incident at the DoM), as none of the animals Voldemort possessed in Albania lived for very long. We know that UglyBaby!Voldemort drank Nagini's venom for its life-sustaining or life-restoring qualities. Snakes, like phoenixes and other creatures, are symbols of resurrection and immortality. (The basis for the symbolism is the snake's shedding of its skin.) Unlike phoenixes, however, due to the serpent's association with the fall from grace in the Garden of Eden, there is a duality to the imagery of the snake. I actually wonder if Voldemort hadn't been drinking Nagini's venom long before Godric's Hollow. Voldemort implies in the graveyard that he employed multiple means to make himself immortal: "You know my goal -- to conquer death. And now, I was tested, and it appeared that one or more of my experiments had worked . . . for I had not been killed, though the curse should have done it." In light of the snake's immortality symbolism, Nagini's venom would seem to be a good candidate for an immortality experiment -- perhaps one that is entirely different from the creation of a Horcrux. Indeed, I did not get the sense in the first chapter of GoF that Pettigrew had conveniently nabbed a local snake to steal some venom. Nagini *already* seemed to have an affinity for Voldemort. If Voldemort had already used Nagini (or her venom) for earlier immortality experiments, this would explain Voldemort's increasingly snakelike appearance, and why he would take on that appearance rather than becoming increasingly Orc-like as he shredded his soul to bits. It explains their apparent affinity for one another in GoF while simultaneously acknowledging that Voldemort did not possess Nagini before attacking Arthur in OOP. It's also possible (since we know nothing about how Horcruxes are made) that Nagini's venom was used as an ingredient in the creation of his Horcruxes and therein lies the connection. Debbie off to untangle the Black family tree [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From amiabledorsai at yahoo.com Mon Jan 30 12:31:06 2006 From: amiabledorsai at yahoo.com (amiabledorsai) Date: Mon, 30 Jan 2006 12:31:06 -0000 Subject: VA/H=Mx13+RP? Snape's Culpability? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147290 Alla: > Do you think Snape thought prophecy had ANY meaning? What meaning do > you think he susbcribed to it? Are you arguing that for him Prophecy > words were just Abracadabra of unknown language and Snape had no > clue what they mean at all? Amiable Dorsai: I'm sure he understood it, he just didn't realize the consequences, that's all. Yes,I can just imagine good old, well-meaning Snape thinking to himself as he left the Hogshead: "Gosh, what an interesting prophecy! I'll have to report this. Good thing that nice Mr. Riddle wouldn't do anything rash, like try to kill The One before The One gets around to vanquishing him. Gee, what a silly thought--imagine going around and killing all the babies born at the end of July. I'm sure glad Mr. Riddle is too level-headed to do anything like that." Amiable Dorsai From willsonkmom at msn.com Mon Jan 30 12:38:47 2006 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Mon, 30 Jan 2006 12:38:47 -0000 Subject: special treatment of Malfoy In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147291 >Fuzz876i wrote: When Harry and Ron > tried to > explain this to Snape they both received detention and > Malfoy got > nothing. Potioncat: First off, Snape is unfair. No argument. It's no wonder Harry isn't fond of him. I don't have my book, but as I recall, Snape showed up very quickly and stopped the duel. He pretended not to notice Hermione was cursed, one of the darkest moments in Snape's page time. No one was punished for fighting, however. The punishment for Ron and Harry was for disrespect, after they yelled at him for his comment about Hermione. Fuzz876i: In The Prisoner of Azkaban Malfoy walked into > class late > after going to the hospital wing and being treated for > the wound > from Buckbeak and all Snape said at that time was to > settle down if > that had been Harry or Ron it would have been > detention or 50 points > a piece from Gryfendor. Potioncat: Hold on a moment. It would have been unfair to dock any student 50 points if they were late due to an injury. So where was the special treatment in not docking Malfoy? Harry is angry and thinks that Snape would have docked him, but the closest example we have of that is when Harry has to leave class early to have photos taken. Snape doesn't dock him then. From willsonkmom at msn.com Mon Jan 30 13:02:18 2006 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Mon, 30 Jan 2006 13:02:18 -0000 Subject: back to Blacks was Re: Snape and DD In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147292 > La Gatta Lucianese: > > Gesundheit. Potioncat: Thank you. > La Gatta Lucianese: > Canon, please? I just checked out Mr. and Mrs. Potter in the HPL, > and nowhere does it say boo about Mrs. Potter's maiden name. Or Mr. > Potter's first name. Potioncat: My mistake. I thought you were referring to Dorea Black as Harry's grandmother. I agree the age doesn't fit. At least "I" don't consider 57 to be elderly!!!!! My teenagers do, of course, but I wouldn't have expected it of JKR. Now that we've had time to discuss the chart a bit, it doesn't look as if the Potters and Longbottoms on the chart are Harry's or Neville's grandparents. Of course, the interesting thing might be, what happened to James's cousin? (the one son of Dorea and Charlus) I'll still put my wizarding fortune on a Sirius-Severus connection rather than a James-Severus connection. James seems to have overcome his feeling about Severus, but Sirius never did. From jez_two at yahoo.com Mon Jan 30 12:35:27 2006 From: jez_two at yahoo.com (Rachel) Date: Mon, 30 Jan 2006 12:35:27 -0000 Subject: The importance of death /Harry and Cedric In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147293 Karen Chuplis wrote: > Grief and Harry is a much more private thing. He has always fought against a show of grief (it seems to me) in overt ways. It is more like it is something SO big, he has no way to express it in words, so he shuts down. < lupinlore wrote: > CEDRIC causes such an explosion and Sirius doesn't? Sorry, don't buy it. And I especially don't buy it because of, of all beings, Kreacher. At the end of OOTP Harry is, quite rightly, full of murderous fury toward Kreacher. Then he becomes Kreacher's master scarcely three weeks later and his response is "Uhhh, okay?" Sorry, that isn't private. That's catatonic. < Jez: I'm afraid I agree with Karen on this one: I think in terms of Cedric, Harry's reaction is about right; have you ever seen/touched a corpse? It is a very weird feeling, even if you have no guilt over the death. As such I think being overly emotional for a while is perfectly natural (this is his first dead body). With Sirius' death Harry was not directly the cause but has a tentative link to the death therefore feels as guilty as he did over Cedric. The difference with Sirius is that he was a major part of Harry's life so his death has a much larger impact. And while Harry is still reeling from Cedric's death and LV's rise he then looses someone so close personally, I would shutdown or go catatonic for a while. Then on top of his struggle with the death he has everyone treading on eggshells around him and asking if he's okay, this causes him to become angry at others rather than dealing with his grief and almost pushes it down further into the realms of `I'll deal with that later'. It could have gone a few different ways but in terms of the plot this was probably the best coping mechanism; bearing in mind that Harry is a sixteen year old who has had a pretty rough life up to this point and has been forced to just carry on, I think his suppressing the grief is realistic and keeps Harry active enough to continue fighting LV (where falling into a well of despair or become furious with everyone wouldn't). Finally I'm going to introduce myself :) I'm Jez, I've been searching for a site that discusses HP (for adults) for ages so I'm VERY pleased to have finally found one. Sorry if I've got any of the quote rules wrong; this is my first post. If there's anything that I've done hideously wrong please contact me and I'll try not to do it again, thanks! From foxmoth at qnet.com Mon Jan 30 14:44:40 2006 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Mon, 30 Jan 2006 14:44:40 -0000 Subject: The importance of death /Harry and Cedric In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147296 Lupinlore: > To me [Harry's grief over Sirius] was as clear as a pond full of mud with an oil slick on top of it. CEDRIC causes such an explosion and Sirius doesn't? Sorry, don't buy it. And I especially don't buy it because of, of all beings, Kreacher. At the end of OOTP Harry is, quite rightly, full of murderous fury toward Kreacher. Then he becomes Kreacher's master scarcely three weeks later and his response is "Uhhh, okay?" Pippin: Scarely three weeks was probably long enough for Harry to decide that all the blame belonged with Snape. "Whatever Dumbledore said, Harry had had time to think over the summer, and had concluded that Snape's snide remarks to Sirius about remaining safely hidden while the rest of the Order of the Phoenix were off fighting Voldemort had probably been a powerful factor in Sirius rushing off to the Ministry the night Sirius had died." --HBP ch 8 Dwelling on Kreacher's role would have been far more painful, because it was *Harry*, not Sirius, that Kreacher duped. Implicit in blaming Kreacher is the acknowledgement that Sirius went to the Ministry because Harry was there, and Harry does *not* want to think about that. Harry would much rather think that Sirius went because of Snape's goading. Pippin From lolita_ns at yahoo.com Mon Jan 30 14:44:39 2006 From: lolita_ns at yahoo.com (lolita_ns) Date: Mon, 30 Jan 2006 14:44:39 -0000 Subject: back to Blacks was Re: Snape and DD In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147297 > Potioncat: > My mistake. I thought you were referring to Dorea Black as Harry's > grandmother. > I'll still put my wizarding fortune on a Sirius-Severus connection > rather than a James-Severus connection. James seems to have overcome > his feeling about Severus, but Sirius never did. Lolita: Hm... James is dead, so he has no feelings about anyone or anything. And I don't recall having read about his overcoming his feelings towards Snape. Unless you are referring to Black & Lupin's conversation with Harry about the trip into Snape's pensieve? To me, it sounded more like James was both pretty spooked (by facing what Sirius really was - i.e. a reckless idiot who let himself be so carried away as to really endanger others, and one of those others was actually his friend - Lupin) and utterly fed up with their feud with Snape after the Werewolf prank. It seems that he let Snape be (not entirely, but he didn't make a sport of hexing Snape and being hexed by him in return after the event), and outgrew his earlier behaviour to the degree that he both became Head boy and got Lily to date him and eventually marry him. But I rather suspect that he still disliked Snape. And Snape disliked him even more than before, for now he owned him a life debt. I would really like to know whether Snape was always the one attacked. Somehow, I can't imagine him as an innocent victim who only defended himself... He *did* invent those curses, after all. Even one of those used on him. And he must have been the first one to use it, as he *was* the one who invented it. As for Sirius and Snape - yes, neither of them overcame their feelings towards the other. Both of them share some kind of arrested development syndrome - in terms of mutual conduct. I mean, really. We got two men 'on the wrong side of 35' who can't bring themselves to converse with one another at a level more mature than that expected of 15 year-olds. Then again, Sirius was addled by his prolonged 'holiday' in Azkaban, and being stuck with 15 year-olds or people (at least) twice his age for better part of 15ish years didn't help Snape's emotional maturation either. And I would say that there is some more backstory than what we have been given so far, which both Snape and Sirius are (i.e. were, in Sirius's case) undoubtedly familiar with. And until we are given that backstory, we can only guess... As for Snape-Sirius connection... I rather doubt it... First of all, I don't think that such information is a) needed to give additional fuel to the fire of Snape-Sirius mutual hatred and b) likely to be crammed into the one book that is left, when Rowling has so many loose ends to tie and new information to give... Book 7 would have to be 2000 pages long in order for her to tie everything (not that I would complain, mind you :) )... I agree with the author of the red hen site about Sirius hating Snape for being the kind of boy that his family would approve of and for pointing him out to James in order to divert James's attention from *him* as the offspring of Dark Wizards. (James *was* known as a hater of all thigs dark - although, it escapes me how then he used the magic we saw him use on Snape which was later identified as dark... Rowling has some issues to resolve regarding dark magic if I am to respect her after the series is over... Not that she is about to listen to me, that much is certain... But I would much prefer to write a lengthy praise on her than a thesis based on disappointment in her skills and ideas...) And let's not forget that, according to Sirius, Snape used to hang out (in his first year only, given their respective ages) with dear cousin Bellatrix... Judging from Sirius's love for her, I would say that this would put him off Snape for certain, if nothing else did. And it's not like there was nothing else... Finally, I don't believe that Snape and Sirius were related. Snape doesn't come across as somebody who has any connections with the upper crust of the society such as the Blacks. He strikes me more as a social climber, with churlish manners and general bad behaviour. Compare him to the Malfoys, and you'll get the idea. He is simply not in their league. His mother's family seem to have been nobodies.(I tend to doubt that they were pureblood at all... Or if they were, they were probably the 'new' purebloods - Rowling did say that families can lose the halfblood status over generations. They were certainly not the people any of the Blacks would have thought were good enough for them) And, judging from Snape's house, they were not very rich, to boot. So... I should better stop here. This is turning out to be a very long post, and I do have another, completely not Potter-related paper to finish... Duty calls... Anyway, feel free to disagree :) Cheers, Lolita. From kchuplis at alltel.net Mon Jan 30 15:04:51 2006 From: kchuplis at alltel.net (Karen) Date: Mon, 30 Jan 2006 09:04:51 -0600 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: The importance of death /Harry and Cedric References: Message-ID: <001f01c625ae$856a9610$b301010a@ConsolidatedTelephone.local> No: HPFGUIDX 147298 lupinlore wrote: > CEDRIC causes such an explosion and Sirius doesn't? Sorry, don't buy it. And I especially don't buy it because of, of all beings, Kreacher. At the end of OOTP Harry is, quite rightly, full of murderous fury toward Kreacher. Then he becomes Kreacher's master scarcely three weeks later and his response is "Uhhh, okay?" Sorry, that isn't private. That's catatonic. < kchuplis: I'd still like canon where you see Harry "Uhh, Ok". First off the end of OoTP he spends an awful lot of time in denial or trying to think of a way that Sirius could come back. Natural. I can still clearly recall dreaming over and over that my fathre was coming back after he died, just in the first few weeks. Everything seemed unreal and quite honestly, I felt sick a lot of the time, but didn't necessarily burst into tears. Then I went into the spacing out mode. People found me extremely quiet. People kind of want to talk to you but you don't want to talk or if you do it's like people are afraid to bring it up. I dunno, sounds like grief to me at least as I have experienced it. That's the funny thing about grief...it's shown differently for everyone (though I really do believe people go through the same process). So maybe I am just relating because that's how it was for me when my father died. Jez: I'm afraid I agree with Karen on this one: I think in terms of Cedric, Harry's reaction is about right; have you ever seen/touched a corpse? It is a very weird feeling, even if you have no guilt over the death. As such I think being overly emotional for a while is perfectly natural (this is his first dead body). kchuplis: True but also, I think if it had JUST been finding Cedric dead he would not have been so emotional But let's look at Harry's first REAL encounter with death as a in your face event and not some past story about your parents: you have just gone through a pretty demanding maze challenge in which you were cut up and dropped on your leg injuring it, then unexpectedly you are suddenly in a creepy graveyard which confuses you, you are tied down, watch your schoolmate mowed down in cold blood, watch a dismemberment, have your arm cut open, have your worst nightmare form in front of you and then torture you numerous (touching the scar, and two crucios I think?) times while a ring of people watch like it's some torture orgy and then use what strength you have left to hold off your worst nightmare and then have the dead schoolmate actually make a request of you to bring the body with as you escape from hell, which you manage to do after being chased down by death eaters and running like hell on your injured leg ....pyshcologically, I guess we have a fairly high TERROR level and physically there can't be an inch of him that isn't in pain (heck, I lose control when I have a migraine, I think that pain and stress levels greatly reduce emotional balance)... I guess my emotional defenses would be pretty well shot to the moon and back at that point , so, I certainly think Harry has plenty of reason to be a bit shell shocked and out of control. OoTP is a lot happening in a little bit of time, but it is not the terrorfest the graveyard was (IMO). [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Mon Jan 30 15:01:54 2006 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Mon, 30 Jan 2006 15:01:54 -0000 Subject: VA/H=Mx13+RP? Snape's Culpability? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147299 Steve: > Again, you think you know the proper interpretation of the Prophecy > because Dumbledore explained it all to you, but if you look at it > objectively, there is virtually no way to know it refers to the > Potters and there about-to-be-born son. Alla: Steve, I actually said several times upthread - I agree that Snape may not have known that prophecy refers to Potters. THAT part of your argument I agree with, although we don't know how much Snape knew at the moment, and I won't exclude that he may have worked out that part too, but YES that is logical. What I do NOT find logical is that Snape did not work out that Prophecy talks about ANY couple who gave birth to the baby who has a power to defeat Voldemort. I just find it THAT clear. I understand we disagree on that one, but that is what I think. What I also don't find plausible AT ALL is that Snape could have expected ANYTHING else from Voldemort but go for a kill right away. NO, I don't think that Snape could have reasonably expected Voldemort to wait for years before going for a kill. That is NOT reasonable to me. Steve: > To the original part of this discussion, I don't see how anyone can > compare Snape's general transfer of information which was highly > subject to interpretation to the blantant willful unconscionable > betrayal of his close friends that Peter commited. Alla: LOL! I think I stopped counting now how many times I said that I am NOT comparing Snape's crimes and Peter's crimes. Peter's crime IS much greater. What I AM saying is that Snape's crime open the gates so to speak for Peter to commit his MUCH MUCH greater crime. People were arguing that they switched SK as secrecy precaution, but without Snape's acting they may have never needed ANY SK in the first place. Granted, it is possible that they would have to go into hiding for different reasons, THEN I would not say that Snape and Peter crimes are tied together, but right now to me they are. > Amiable Dorsai: > > I'm sure he understood it, he just didn't realize the consequences, > that's all. > > Yes,I can just imagine good old, well-meaning Snape thinking to > himself as he left the Hogshead: "Gosh, what an interesting prophecy! > I'll have to report this. Good thing that nice Mr. Riddle wouldn't > do anything rash, like try to kill The One before The One gets around > to vanquishing him. Gee, what a silly thought--imagine going around > and killing all the babies born at the end of July. I'm sure glad Mr. > Riddle is too level-headed to do anything like that." > > Alla: HAHAHA! Well, maybe Snape thought that Mr. Riddle would invite the prophecy couple and their baby for dinner ( as I always say) and would ask them nicely to teach their baby not to vanguish him or something. :-) He is such a compassionate person after all. :) What was the initial point of me replying to your post? I am am afraid not much except saying how much I agree with it. JMO, Alla From sherriola at earthlink.net Mon Jan 30 15:03:52 2006 From: sherriola at earthlink.net (Sherry Gomes) Date: Mon, 30 Jan 2006 07:03:52 -0800 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: The importance of death /Harry and Cedric In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <001a01c625ae$62e99410$0400a8c0@pensive> No: HPFGUIDX 147300 -----Original Message----- From: HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com [mailto:HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of pippin_999 Sent: Monday, January 30, 2006 6:45 AM To: HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: The importance of death /Harry and Cedric Lupinlore: > To me [Harry's grief over Sirius] was as clear as a pond full of mud with an oil slick on top of it. CEDRIC causes such an explosion and Sirius doesn't? Sorry, don't buy it. Sherry now: Sorry, Lupinlore, I have to disagree as well, and you know, I almost always agree with your take on things. But being a very private griever, i felt Harry's grief for Sirius was absolutely convincing. When my dad died eight years ago, if you didn't know me well, you might not have thought it touched me much. I never spoke of it, not even to my sister and brothers or my best friends. I still rarely speak of my dad. alone, i spent many sleepless nights, many agonizing aching days, doing my job, going about my life and feeling totally torn apart inside. But nobody would have known, and people might even have said that I was taking it very well. I was not. That's how I saw Harry's grief for Sirius. Some things are too deep and painful to explode over, and Harry is more the type to pull his sorrow into himself. as for Harry's grief over Cedric, I think that was a combination of things. i don't think it was just Cedric. He'd been betrayed by someone he'd trusted. He'd see Voldemort return to his body, been tortured and mocked and slashed with a knife; he'd seen the echoes of his parents; and Cedric's only reason for being there was that he and Harry decided to take the tri-wizard cup together. On top of that, he had fudge's disbelief in the hospital wing, and then the abrupt return to the Dursleys, where noone from the WW bothered to keep in touch with news and information. He felt completely abandoned by everyone. I think all of that put together is why his grief over Cedric seems so out of proportion when compared to his grief for Sirius. But that grief for Sirius rang more true for me than almost any of Harry's other emotional reactions in the past. sherry From lucianam73 at yahoo.com.br Mon Jan 30 16:10:10 2006 From: lucianam73 at yahoo.com.br (lucianam73) Date: Mon, 30 Jan 2006 16:10:10 -0000 Subject: Who cast the Dark Mark was Re: ESE!Lupin condensed In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147301 > Pippin wrote: > Lupin told Sirius that a record of the prophecy was stored in the > DoM, mistakenly believing that Dumbledore would share this information > with Harry. Lupin put Podmore under the Imperius curse and made him > try to break into the DoM. > > When Sirius revealed that he thought Harry knew about the prophecy, > Lupin had no choice but to kill him. Lupin "ran" Draco in HBP, put > Tonks under the Imperius curse to use as a messenger, and arranged for > Fenrir and another Death Eater to escape from the castle. > lucianam: I've been reading a lot of ESE!Lupin threads, but there might be some points I've missed. I wouldn't want to come up with something like it's a new thing when it's probably been discussed many times before, so Iapologize if this Dark Mark question has been covered in previous ESE!Lupin threads. Do any list members think Lupin might have set off the Dark Mark? Or even, does anybody think the identity of the person who cast the Death Mark over Hogwarts castle might be important at all? I never gave it much thought, I just assumed one of the Death Eaters who entered the castle did it, and why should that be important? It's not something Draco mentions when he's talking to Dumbledore in the Astronomy Tower. Dumbledore doesn't ask, either. In fact, nobody is curious about it, nobody asks, 'When exactly did this person cast the DM? Who cast it?' until Lupin brings up the subject. Lupin says the Order were fighting the Death Eaters and 'One of them, Gibbon, broke away and headed up the Tower stairs_' Only then Harry asks, 'To set off the Mark?' 'He must have done, yes, they must have arranged that before they left the Room of Requirement,' said Lupin. 'But I don't think Gibbon liked the idea of waiting up there alone for Dumbledore, because he came running back downstairs to rejoin the fight and was hit by a Killing Curse that just missed me.' I find it funny that the only one person is able to identify the caster of the Mark AND said caster is dead. I have no reason to suspect Lupin is lying, other than the ESE!Lupin theory, but it is funny that we only have Lupin's word on this. There is also Tonks's remark: 'We were in trouble, we were losing. Gibbon was down...' Of course that does not validate Lupin's suggestion (very smart of him to suggest and not affirm, I might add) , but it does validates the id of the dead Death Eater as Gibbon, thus reinforcing the idea that what Lupin said was true. You know, if you tell a false story, but show part of it as true, people will more easily believe your whole fabrication is perfectly correct. In my opinion, Tonks is very likely under Amortentia, so whatever she says that looks good for Lupin cannot be trusted. Well, the ESE!Lupin threads I found don't seem to cover HBP (or OotP, it seems) much, or maybe it's my fault that I only find the ones that deal with the Prank, Shrieking Shack or Wormtail in greater detail. So I wonder if anybody could link me to threads discussing ESE!Lupin and Ootp, specially the DoM and Sirius's death, and ESE!Lupin in HBP. I'll really appreciate it. From ceridwennight at hotmail.com Mon Jan 30 16:20:26 2006 From: ceridwennight at hotmail.com (Ceridwen) Date: Mon, 30 Jan 2006 16:20:26 -0000 Subject: The importance of death /Harry and Cedric In-Reply-To: <001a01c625ae$62e99410$0400a8c0@pensive> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147302 Sherry: > > Sorry, Lupinlore, I have to disagree as well, and you know, I almost always > agree with your take on things. But being a very private griever, i felt > Harry's grief for Sirius was absolutely convincing. When my dad died eight > years ago, if you didn't know me well, you might not have thought it touched > me much. I never spoke of it, not even to my sister and brothers or my best > friends. I still rarely speak of my dad. alone, i spent many sleepless > nights, many agonizing aching days, doing my job, going about my life and > feeling totally torn apart inside. But nobody would have known, and people > might even have said that I was taking it very well. Ceridwen: I'm a private griever, too. I lost my father right before I turned sixteen, so I was even at about the same age as Harry was when he lost Sirius. One completely insensitive woman at our church (the pastor's wife!) actually told my mother that I 'wasn't too upset' over my father's death. As if she knew me! We had plenty of time to figure out he was going to die, he had been in and out of the hospital for the past year. But when it happens, after thinking it will but it doesn't for so long, it's a complete shock, and only then is the reality brought home. I grieved. And it took years to stop thinking I could tell him something. But I didn't think it was anybody else's business. In fact, sharing it with anyone who wasn't ***extremely*** close (my mother, who was going through an equivalent time, not even my best friends) seemed like a profane lessening of the magnitude of the loss. Sherry: > Some things are too deep and painful to explode over, and Harry is > more the type to pull his sorrow into himself. > > as for Harry's grief over Cedric, I think that was a combination of things. > i don't think it was just Cedric. He'd been betrayed by someone he'd > trusted. He'd see Voldemort return to his body, been tortured and mocked > and slashed with a knife; he'd seen the echoes of his parents; and Cedric's > only reason for being there was that he and Harry decided to take the > tri-wizard cup together. On top of that, he had fudge's disbelief in the > hospital wing, and then the abrupt return to the Dursleys, where noone from > the WW bothered to keep in touch with news and information. He felt > completely abandoned by everyone. I think all of that put together is why > his grief over Cedric seems so out of proportion when compared to his grief > for Sirius. But that grief for Sirius rang more true for me than almost any > of Harry's other emotional reactions in the past. Ceridwen: And, as someone else pointed out, this was his first remembered exposure to a dead body; Cedric was near Harry's age; Harry was already emotionally on the edge as Sherry points out; somebody else mentions that he also has to bring the body back to the Diggorys which will be emotional in itself as he feels their grief; Cedric isn't as close as Sirius, so the profanity of sharing the loss will not be as great. And, he is trying to come to terms with his own possible involvement without the potential of putting it off onto someone else. He has an outright villian in Crouch!Moody, so there is no secret culpability that he can imagine and/or latch onto. It's in the open. So he has to wonder what he might have done to supplement that (sharing the trophy). And, it's his first experience with death and its associated guilt. By the time Sirius dies, he has begun to learn how to place the blame so he isn't so internally tortured by the 'what- ifs' of his own actions. He still has more steps to take, IMO. The true reason Cedric and Sirius died is because Voldemort wants to take over the WW. That's the root reason why they both died. Sharing the trophy was a noble gesture. If it hadn't been for Voldemort's plan, it would have been a stunning example of teamwork. Snape and Sirius had been taunting each other and worse for years. If Voldemort hadn't planned to get Harry to the MoM, they might still be taunting each other, Sirius alive, everything as it was. Perhaps his blame placing has something to do with not being ready quite yet, as of the beginning of HBP, to face the magnitude of Voldemort's evil presence, and his own future role in stopping him? Ceridwen. From willsonkmom at msn.com Mon Jan 30 16:26:19 2006 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Mon, 30 Jan 2006 16:26:19 -0000 Subject: DD and Snape's Culpability In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147303 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "dumbledore11214" wrote: > > Steve: > > > Again, you think you know the proper interpretation of the Prophecy > > because Dumbledore explained it all to you, but if you look at it > > objectively, there is virtually no way to know it refers to the > > Potters and there about-to-be-born son. > > > Alla: > > What I do NOT find logical is that Snape did not work out that > Prophecy talks about ANY couple who gave birth to the baby who has a > power to defeat Voldemort. I just find it THAT clear. I understand > we disagree on that one, but that is what I think. Potioncat: I agree with Steve, as stated somewhere upthread: from the first part of the prophecy, there is no way to tell it's about a baby. The one approaches may mean that an adult wizard is getting closer to his attack on LV. It could have meant a grown man with a July birthday whose parents had defied LV. LV had been around long enough for that. So that Snape would not have a strong reason to expect it was about a young woman and her child. He was a DE and should have been held accountable for his actions. Which I think he was by DD. My timeline may be off, but I think it's significant that Regulus and Severus came to a parting of the DE way at about the same time. We also have Sirius's statement that in the beginning, the WW didn't understand what LV was up to. But, here's my real concern, did DD know that Snape was a DE that day when Snape overheard the prophecy? If he did, why did he let him go? Surely DD knew Snape would go straight to LV. If he didn't know, why didn't DD take some action just to keep the prophecy a secret in general? From jlnbtr at yahoo.com Mon Jan 30 17:50:40 2006 From: jlnbtr at yahoo.com (Juli) Date: Mon, 30 Jan 2006 09:50:40 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] back to Blacks was Re: Snape and DD In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20060130175040.83099.qmail@web53107.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 147304 potioncat wrote: ...edited... I'll still put my wizarding fortune on a Sirius-Severus connection rather than a James-Severus connection. James seems to have overcome his feeling about Severus, but Sirius never did. Juli: Canon Please? where does it say that James overcame his feelings about Severus? AFAIK the only mention of a decrease in their animosity is in OoP, right after Harry goes into Snape's memory and talks to Remus and Sirius, they said that James grew up, he didn't go around cursing everyone, well except Snape, but Lily didn't know about this... They said that James and Severus always hated each other. I think Sirius did overcome a tiny little bit his feelings over Severus. They've at least shaked hands! and they are working on the same side. Not like they were ever going to become best friends or anything. Juli Aol: jlnbtr Yahoo: jlnbtr --------------------------------- Yahoo! Autos. Looking for a sweet ride? Get pricing, reviews, & more on new and used cars. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From katmac at katmac.cncdsl.com Mon Jan 30 18:18:34 2006 From: katmac at katmac.cncdsl.com (lagattalucianese) Date: Mon, 30 Jan 2006 18:18:34 -0000 Subject: back to Blacks was Re: Snape and DD In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147305 > > Potionct: > ... > > I'll still put my wizarding fortune on a Sirius-Severus connection > rather than a James-Severus connection. James seems to have overcome > his feeling about Severus, but Sirius never did. > La Gatta Lucianese: But wouldn't it be the most delicious irony if the family that Harry wants so desperately turned out to be Snape. Talk about having to rethink the situation! On both of their parts, of course, but especially on Harry's, since I don't think Snape hates Harry an nth as much as Harry hates Snape. From katmac at katmac.cncdsl.com Mon Jan 30 18:58:18 2006 From: katmac at katmac.cncdsl.com (lagattalucianese) Date: Mon, 30 Jan 2006 18:58:18 -0000 Subject: back to Blacks was Re: Snape and DD In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147306 > > Lolita: > ... > > I would really like to know whether Snape was always the one attacked. > Somehow, I can't imagine him as an innocent victim who only defended > himself... He *did* invent those curses, after all. Even one of those > used on him. And he must have been the first one to use it, as he > *was* the one who invented it. > La Gatta Lucianese: I'm sure Snape gave as good as he got; he says in HBP.28 that James never dared attack him unless it was four to one. But I'd bet my buckled booties that the Marauders were the ones to start it. Snape just looked like such easy meat, this geeky, brainy, antisocial, undergrown, homely kid with no particular friends or supporters. > > ...and being stuck with 15 year-olds or people (at least) > twice his age for better part of 15ish years didn't help Snape's > emotional maturation either. > > ...And let's not forget that, according to Sirius, Snape used > to hang out (in his first year only, given their respective ages) with > dear cousin Bellatrix... Judging from Sirius's love for her, I would > say that this would put him off Snape for certain, if nothing else > did. And it's not like there was nothing else... > La Gatta Lucianese: But given the age difference, and more particularly the relationship between Snape and Bellatrix that we see in HBP.2, I doubt there was any love lost there. I suspect Snape hung out with that "Slytherin gang" more for protection and because he didn't have anybody else than from close friendship. The poor kid really seems not to have had much of anybody close to him throughout his school years. > > Finally, I don't believe that Snape and Sirius were related. Snape > doesn't come across as somebody who has any connections with the upper > crust of the society such as the Blacks. He strikes me more as a > social climber, with churlish manners and general bad behaviour. > Compare him to the Malfoys, and you'll get the idea. He is simply not > in their league. His mother's family seem to have been nobodies.... > > Lolita. > La Gatta Lucianese: But this could also be the case if Snape grew up in poverty because his mother was a pure-blood in disgrace and his father was a Muggle. Given Eileen's "cross and sullen" nature (HBP.25), Severus may well have been closer to his father than his mother, and picked up blue- collar Muggle behavior from him. (Been there, done that, but my father was a scholar and a gentleman, so I turned out better than poor Severus.) Come to think of it, why do we assume that the scene from Harry's childhood that Harry legilimensed (OotP.26) was Harry's *father* (if it was his father) being abusive? (Yeah, yeah, I know, the assumption is that in cases like this, it's always the man's fault until proven otherwise, right?) How do we know that little Severus wasn't crying over something his *mother* had done to him that his father was furious with her about? As for Eileen "cowering", any manipulative woman has *that* tactic down cold. I've watched my mother goad my father until he was almost blind with fury (often over something abusive she'd done to me), and then when she thought she could gain the highest psychological upper hand, turn on the tears, pull the "helpless little woman being yelled at", and put all the wrong on him. From lolita_ns at yahoo.com Mon Jan 30 21:14:14 2006 From: lolita_ns at yahoo.com (lolita_ns) Date: Mon, 30 Jan 2006 21:14:14 -0000 Subject: back to Blacks was Re: Snape and DD In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147307 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "lagattalucianese" wrote: > >> I'm sure Snape gave as good as he got; he says in HBP.28 that James > never dared attack him unless it was four to one. But I'd bet my > buckled booties that the Marauders were the ones to start it. Snape > just looked like such easy meat, this geeky, brainy, antisocial, > undergrown, homely kid with no particular friends or supporters. Lolita: Well, he didn't seem to have friends or supporters in the pensieve, but that was his 5th year. However, according to what Sirius told Harry and co. in GoF, Snape was a part of a whole little *gang* of Slytherins, among which he mentioned the Lestranges. Let's employ some maths. We know for a fact that Bellatrix is the eldest of the 3 sisters. From Tonks's age (in OotP she says that she qualified as an Auror a year ago. Auror training, according to McGonagall, takes 3 years. The majority of children are 18 when they graduate from Hogwarts. That would make Tonks at least 22 when we first meet her - 18 + 3 + 1.)we can calculate that her mother, Andromeda, must have been at least 41 in OotP - L.Malfoy's contemporary, and 5 years older than both Sirius and Snape, who were 36 at the beginning of OotP. That would make her a 6th year when Snape was in his first. In order to be the eldest sister, AND to be a part of the group Snape used to hang out with, Bellatrix must have been a 7th year when he started Hogwarts. Their time there thus overlapped for a single year. Malfoy (whom Sirius so conspicuously doesn't mention) left when Snape finished his 2nd year. We also know that Snape knew a lot of hexes when he turned up at Hogwarts. So, Bellatrix and co. probably took him up and used him for his inventive little curses. In return, they probably provided some protection, and Snape probably used it to get at Potter and Black (I agree with you that the Marauders - or, more precisely, Sirius - started the dislike. But since Snape had a back-up team when he was just a first year, he probably started the actual attacks). However, after his first year, the majority of the group whose part he had been were gone from school. After Snape's second year, Malfoy was gone as well. The tables had turned, and now Snape was the one without support. And the open war began. It lasted, as far as I can tell, until it culminated with the Werewolf episode, which was hushed up, and the hostilities, while still there, were not so openly exercised. > La Gatta Lucianese: > > But given the age difference, and more particularly the relationship > between Snape and Bellatrix that we see in HBP.2, I doubt there was > any love lost there. Lolita: I agree. He was probably more often than not slapped by dear Bellatrix if he dared contradict her on something (or if she felt like it). But, while he may have been a stupid, naive kid to let himself be taken up by them, I bet he used every bit of power the relationship provided him for not-so-noble ends. Still,he must have realised that they were using him far more than he was using them, and was actually quite relieved when they left. But during the time he hung out with them, he must have earned himself a genuine dislike among his peers. And he seems not to have bothered to make any other friends after his original 'gang' had left. Plus, his disposition and general behaviour, if he behaved anything like he does now, didn't serve him as a recommendation either. No wonder he was alone in his 5th year. > he didn't have anybody else > than from close friendship. The poor kid really seems not to have had > much of anybody close to him throughout his school years. Lolita: Well, he seems to have remained quite close with L.Malfoy. Although Malfoy, too, left soon after the rest of the gangleaders, he must have been a lot better to Snape than Bellatrix had been, for the two of them are still rather chummy (not all of that is just for the sake of 'The Cause' - Snape seems to be genuinely close to Lucius, and to *actually* like Draco). And let's not forget about Narcissa - Snape's and her time at Hogwarts overlapped too - she may be anything from 2 years younger (in order to have a 16 year-old son in 1996, she couldn't have finished school later than 1979) to 5 years older than Snape. I wonder when the two of *them* became so close... And then, there was Lily. Hmm... Rowling really needs to give us that 1970s backstory. > La Gatta Lucianese: > > ... Snape grew up in poverty because > his mother was a pure-blood in disgrace and his father was a Muggle. > Given Eileen's "cross and sullen" nature (HBP.25), Severus may well > have been closer to his father than his mother, and picked up blue- > collar Muggle behavior from him. Lolita: Given that there is no doubt that Snape was wizarding-raised (remember the hexes he knew before he even came to school and everything he has to say about Muggles - e.g. that only a Muggle would call Legilimency mind-reading), I would say not. If he had been close to his Muggle father, why on earth would he join a movement whose idea of fun was to torture Muggles? Plus, judging from the fact that no one seems to have known that he was a literal halfblood, and that he invented the Prince-based soubriquet for himself, I would say that he identified more with his mother's family than with the one of his father. Cheers, Lolita. From gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk Mon Jan 30 21:43:12 2006 From: gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk (Geoff Bannister) Date: Mon, 30 Jan 2006 21:43:12 -0000 Subject: special treatment of Malfoy In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147308 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "potioncat" wrote: > > >Fuzz876i wrote: > When Harry and Ron > > tried to > > explain this to Snape they both received detention and > > Malfoy got > > nothing. > > Potioncat: > First off, Snape is unfair. No argument. It's no wonder Harry isn't > fond of him. > > I don't have my book, but as I recall, Snape showed up very quickly > and stopped the duel. He pretended not to notice Hermione was cursed, > one of the darkest moments in Snape's page time. No one was punished > for fighting, however. The punishment for Ron and Harry was for > disrespect, after they yelled at him for his comment about Hermione. > > Fuzz876i: > In The Prisoner of Azkaban Malfoy walked into > > class late > > after going to the hospital wing and being treated for > > the wound > > from Buckbeak and all Snape said at that time was to > > settle down if > > that had been Harry or Ron it would have been > > detention or 50 points > > a piece from Gryfendor. > > Potioncat: > Hold on a moment. It would have been unfair to dock any student 50 > points if they were late due to an injury. So where was the special > treatment in not docking Malfoy? Harry is angry and thinks that Snape > would have docked him, but the closest example we have of that is > when Harry has to leave class early to have photos taken. Snape > doesn't dock him then. > Geoff: How about: '"Fifty points from Gryffindor for lateness, I think," said Snape. ""And, let me see, another twenty for your Muggle attire. you know, I don't believe any house has ever been in negative figures this early in the term - we haven't even started pudding. You might have set a record, Potter" (HBP "Snape Victorious" pp.153-54 UK edition) Well, that might fill the bill. OK, Harry won't tell Snape why he is late but Snape must know there is a reason and he should be able to see that Harry has been bleeding. But is he going to? No way. 'He knew that Snape had come to fetch him for this, for the few minutes when he could needle and torment Harry without anyone else listening.' (ibid. p.154) I think that fits the definition of unfair. From mmmwintersteiger at yahoo.com Mon Jan 30 20:56:04 2006 From: mmmwintersteiger at yahoo.com (mmmwintersteiger) Date: Mon, 30 Jan 2006 20:56:04 -0000 Subject: Will there be an ESE!character in Book 7? In-Reply-To: <43DDA2D4.3060005@sprynet.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147309 Magda: >I assume that Harry will undergo a personal betrayal in Book > >7> Bart: >It's probably going to be Neville> Michelle: IMO-There is no way it's Neville, he's had too much personal trauma and wouldn't cause that kind of pain to another, especially a friend. I think it will be someone in the OOTP or possibly a Hogwarts professor. I have my suspicions on who it would be but it is all just based on my gut feelings and nothing concrete. On the other hand, I do think Neville is going to be a very important and pivotal character in book 7 Michelle From miles at martinbraeutigam.de Mon Jan 30 21:47:49 2006 From: miles at martinbraeutigam.de (Miles) Date: Mon, 30 Jan 2006 22:47:49 +0100 Subject: VA/H=Mx13+RP? Snape's Culpability? References: Message-ID: <008b01c625e6$d10af5a0$14b2a8c0@rechnerchen> No: HPFGUIDX 147310 lupinlore wrote: > Why was Voldemort's reaction neither sane nor logical? Let's see, > he's > told that the one with the power to destroy him will be born as the > seventh month wanes to parents who have thrice defied him. This means > it can only be one of two possbilities. Miles: This child was not born then. So nobody could know that there are *only* two possibilities. You judge the situation by information that neither Snape, Voldemort nor anyone had or could have, unless they would know the number of children born in the future. From ed9743621 at yahoo.com Mon Jan 30 11:49:27 2006 From: ed9743621 at yahoo.com (Ed) Date: Mon, 30 Jan 2006 03:49:27 -0800 (PST) Subject: Some Questions on Book 6 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20060130114927.67082.qmail@web33514.mail.mud.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 147311 Hello There!! I'm actually a new member of this group, and yes, I am a great fan of Harry Potter. I have just actually finished Book 6: the Half Blood Prince and was quite stunned that Snape murdered Dumbledore. Can anyone tell me if: 1. Dumbledore is really dead or would be returning back in the last Book (I hope so)? 2. Was the killing of Dumbledore by Snape a deliberate one or is just a front to continue his spying duty on Voldemort? Looking forward to hear your views and comments!! ed9743621 From fuzz876i at yahoo.com Mon Jan 30 15:58:20 2006 From: fuzz876i at yahoo.com (fuzz876i) Date: Mon, 30 Jan 2006 15:58:20 -0000 Subject: Snape, Voldemort, the prophecy (Re: VA/H=Mx13+RP? Snape's Culpability?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147312 > Alla: > > Do you think Snape thought prophecy had ANY meaning? > > Amiable Dorsai: > Gee, what a silly thought--imagine going around > and killing all the babies born at the end of July. fuzz876i: Snape knew perfectly well what the prophecy meant even if he did only hear half of it. As Dumbledore stated that it could have been one of two, Harry or Neville. If Snape had heard the rest of the prophecy then he would have known that Voldemort would Mark one child as his equal. Why is it a silly thought killing all babies born in July? Herod the king at the time of Christ's birth killed children 2 and under. So why couldn't Voldemort kill all children and their families born in July? IMO he needed the rest of the prophecy to tell him what would happen by trying to kill the child. From mmmwintersteiger at yahoo.com Mon Jan 30 20:34:33 2006 From: mmmwintersteiger at yahoo.com (mmmwintersteiger) Date: Mon, 30 Jan 2006 20:34:33 -0000 Subject: Thestrals be the key / Owls In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147313 La Gatta Lucianese: > A thestral who knows almost as much about Horcruxes as Dumbledore > does, because when he isn't flapping around like an overgrown bat, > he devotes himself to teaching Defense Against the Dark Arts, and > planning the Order's defense... Interesting point of view. You seem to be inferring that someone's animagus is a thestral. Would that even be possible? It seems that thestrals are magical animals, like a unicorn. I don't know if you could have an animagus that is a magical creature. If it was a possibilty then such a wizard would be very helpful to Harry in book 7. I have been wondering since book 6 how Harry would begin such a quest for the horcruxes. He doesn't have near the magical knowledge that DD had, just look at how DD searched out the magical traces in the cave. Harry didn't even know what he was looking for. If there was indeed someone that has vested as much time as Dumbledore that would inded be very interesting. michelle From judisimecek at yahoo.com Mon Jan 30 20:56:40 2006 From: judisimecek at yahoo.com (iadoreharry) Date: Mon, 30 Jan 2006 20:56:40 -0000 Subject: Locket in Black house In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147314 > La Gatta Lucianese: > It [locket] was tossed into the rubbish sack, along with the > other odds and ends from the drawing-room cabinets (OotP.6). If > it was retrieved by Kreacher, it wasn't in his lair under the > boiler when Hermione delivered his Christmas present (OotP.23). And does it matter? If RAB found it, surely he would have destroyed the bit of soul living inside it? JKR doesn't really say what has to be done to the Horcruxes to rid them of Voldy, so maybe it's just enough that RAB found it and did something with it? Not sure.. Judi From stevejjen at earthlink.net Mon Jan 30 22:13:51 2006 From: stevejjen at earthlink.net (Jen Reese) Date: Mon, 30 Jan 2006 22:13:51 -0000 Subject: VA/H=Mx13+RP? Snape's Culpability? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147315 Steve: > We know the one is approaching. We know his or her parents have > defied Voldemort three times. We know he/she was born in July. > Approaching could mean taveling. Defied doesn't mean defeat or > elude; it simply means to oppose. Yes, born as the seventh month > dies, but in what year? Does it mean 'will be born' or does it > mean 'was born'? Potioncat: > I agree with Steve, as stated somewhere upthread: from the first > part of the prophecy, there is no way to tell it's about a baby. > The one approaches may mean that an adult wizard is getting closer > to his attack on LV. It could have meant a grown man with a July > birthday whose parents had defied LV. LV had been around long > enough for that. Jen: We have canon straight from Dumbledore's mouth that Snape knew the prophecy referred specifically to a child: "But he did not know-- had no possible way of knowing--which boy Voldemort would hunt from then onwards." (Seer Overheard, p. 512, Blooms.) Maybe Dumbledore is viewing the situation in retrospect, forgetting what it was like to hear the prophecy for the first time? I think the fact that both DD and LV interpreted the prophecy independently to refer to an infant was because of the identifier "born to those who thrice defied them." While "appraoches" is definitely ambiguous, including parents as an identifier is meant to narrow the field. The other prophecy was that way too--general to specific, a narrowing down of the meaning. Yes, it *could* refer to an adult but why would that particular phrase be used? An adult would be known by other things besides his parents hopefully, or it's doubtful he's much of a threat! Steve: > In the few minute, or at best couple of distracted hours, before > Snape reached Voldemort, I really don't think he could have worked > out the interpretation that Voldemort eventually arrived at. The > truth is, we don't even know if Voldemort got it right. He simply > decided what it meant, then acted as if his analysis was true > thereby making it true. Jen: No he didn't work it out. He didn't know which "child" it would be nor did he work out "the parents he [LV] would destroy in his murderous quest were people that Professor Snape knew, that they were your mother and father--" (ibid) According to Dumbledore, Snape worked out the general but not the specific. Unless Snape lied to Dumbledore or Dumbledore is attributing more knowledge to Snape than he possessed at the time, the meaning is pretty clear to me. Jen R. From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Mon Jan 30 22:22:30 2006 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Mon, 30 Jan 2006 22:22:30 -0000 Subject: VA/H=Mx13+RP? Snape's Culpability? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147316 Carol earlier: > > Think about how long it takes to run (or be thrown downstairs) and to Apparate. That's how long young Snape would have had to think about the Prophecy. Possibly he didn't even think about the meaning and implication of the words until he was reciting them. At that point he would have seen Voldemort's reaction and realized that Voldemort interpreted the Prophecy to mean that an unborn child was the threat and that he (LV) intended to identify and kill that unborn child. I still contend that young Snape, intent on getting to his boss with a potentially important but obscurely worded piece of information, did not have time to reason it out. Just memorize it, Apparate, and report to LV. > > Alla responded: > > Thanks for the explanation, but I sincerely think that your explanation is not supported by the canon we have at all. IMO of course. Yes, you said at the end that you don't think that Snape is stupid, but from the picture you portrayed I see not just stupid, but idiotic Snape. He did not realise the meaning of the words? Erm... does he have sufficient knowledge of English? The Prophecy is ambigious, it is not that ambigious that anybody could not decipher that the one with the Power to destroy Dark Lord approaches, IMO. > > Do you think Snape thought prophecy had ANY meaning? What meaning do you think he susbcribed to it? Are you arguing that for him Prophecy words were just Abracadabra of unknown language and Snape had no clue what they mean at all? Carol responds: This is the second time in recent weeks that you've misunderstood me, clearly demonstrating that the ability to understand English words is not the same as the ability to interpret them in the same way as another person. (My apologies if my post, like the Prophecy, was ambiguous.) For that matter, the existence of this list and the varying interpretations of canon demonstrate the same thing: knowing the dictionary definition of the words does not guarantee that any two readers or hearers will interpret them in the same way, especially in cases where crucial information is omitted. Your interpretation of the Prophecy, as Steve and I have both pointed out, is based on Dumbledore's explanation to Harry, information to which young Snape was not privy, even after he had time to sit down and think about what the partial Prophecy might mean. I am emphatically *not* saying that Snape didn't understand plain English or that he thought the words were some sort of magical jargon ("Abracadabra of unknown language"). The words of the Prophecy are not plain English, a point I'll deal with later. As for the meaning young Snape ascribed to the Prophecy, it would only be (IMO) that the Prophecy (if genuine) revealed a threat to the Dark Lord from someone born at the end of July, someone whose parents had at some point and in some way "thrice defied" Voldemort. But Snape would also know that the Prophecy was incomplete and that prophecies in general are cloaked in ambiguity. He would, IMO, be cautious in interpreting it, *not* because he's stupid or doesn't understand English (I never said that, as I think you must know) but because he's intelligent and, unlike Voldemort, logically minded. (DD gives us evidence in HBP that Voldemort is superstitious and paranoid, as Snape is not.) As Steve has said elsewhere in the thread, "the one with the power to vanquish the Dark Lord approaches" sounds as if a full-fledged adult wizard, already possessing the power to destroy Voldemort, has arrived on the scene--very different from the impending birth, some months in the future, of an as yet unidentifiable baby who *will be given* the power to defeat Voldemort by Voldemort himself--a bit of information that neither Snape nor Voldemort possesses because Snape didn't hear that part of the Prophecy. And as Steve pointed out, "born as the seventh month dies" merely means "born at the end of July." Yes, Snape could and would have figured that much out even as he Apparated to report the Prophecy to Voldemort. But "dies" is present tense, and it isn't the end of July when he's reporting to Voldemort, so "born as the seventh month dies" can either mean *will be born* or *was born,* not *is born* in the present moment. The Prophecy, ambiguous like all prophecies, does not say which July is meant, and the idea that the One is at the moment a fetus simply does not fit with the idea that the One "approaches" (now, at the present moment) and already possesses the power to defeat the Dark Lord (another bit of misdirection by JKR and the Prophecy itself, since neither Harry nor Neville is born with this power). Basically, young Snape can only tell Voldemort that he was eavesdropping on Dumbledore, who was interviewing a candidate for the Divination position, and that the woman slipped into a trance and spoke what seemed to be a prophecy, of which Snape had only overheard a part. I think that even at twenty, young Snape would have been cautious in delivering this information. (Note how carefully he weighs his words to Harry in the Occlumency lessons. Conveying news to Voldemort of a possible nemesis would require even greater caution.) He would in any case have known that prophecies are by their nature ambiguous and that he had only heard part of the prophecy, which would make interpreting it based only on partial knowledge dangerous; and he would probably have known that many prophecies had only come to pass because those involved in the prophecy had acted to thwart them (e.g., the Oedipus story, which is probably known in the WW given the existence of sphinxes and the use of classical names in certain families). I don't think that Snape would have leaped to the same conclusions that Voldemort did--that the threat came from an unborn baby who was most likely the child of Order members who had fought Voldemort three times ("defy," as Steve points out, does not mean "fought"--it means "disregard" or "resist"). "The One" could be anybody born at the end of any July whose parents had at any time defied Voldemort in any way. (Granted, he's unlikely to be a Muggleborn since Muggles would be unlikely to defy Voldemort, but it's only by mulling over the words "thrice defied" that we arrive at that conclusion.) The first few lines of the Prophecy don't even make clear that the One is male: "He" is only used in the portion that Snape didn't overhear. As for the supposed lack of canon support for my position, I have already given the evidence, but I'll repeat it in condensed form. 1) Dumbledore says that Snape could not possibly have known how Voldemort would *interpret* the Prophecy, which implies that the meaning of the Prophecy, even the portion that Snape reports, is *not* self-evident. 2) DD also points out that Snape had no way of knowing who the unborn infant was even when he understood how LV interpreted the Prophecy. And 3) even Harry thinks that the logical thing for Voldemort to do would be to wait and see which boy appeared to present a threat rather than going after a baby. But Voldemort doesn't act logically (or what I consider to be logically), as Snape at some point realizes. (We don't know how Voldemort acted when Snape delivered the Prophecy or how long it took for Snape to realize what LV intended to do. We only know that some time *after Harry's birth*, months after the Prophecy itself was delivered, he realized that Voldemort intended to attack Harry and his parents, and possibly the Longbottoms for good measure. Apparently it took a planned attack on people Snape knew to make Voldemort's interpretation and its evil consequences clear to him. Once young Snape understood--not the supposedly self-evident meaning of the partial Prophecy but Voldemort's *interpretation* of it *and* LV's *intention to thwart the Prophecy* by killing people Snape knew, Snape went to Dumbledore. Remorse didn't yet play a role, IMO; he was just trying to prevent his revelation from having terrible consequences. In DD's words, he "returned to our side" ("returned" being mysteriously unexplained) *before* Godric's Hollow, spying on LV before he began teaching, and, if we take his words in PoA at face value, attempting somehow to warn James Potter of his and his family's danger. When both the warning and his spying failed to save the Potters, the remorse kicked in (IMO). I realize that the part of my post about Apparating is only speculation, but it's based on the way wizards normally travel and it certainly seems like what young Snape would have done in those circumstances. And in the limited time available, he could not have come to his own tentative understanding of what the partial Prophecy might mean, much less anticipate how Voldemort would interpret it and choose to act on it. Canon *does* support that interpretation--unless you choose to believe that Dumbledore is wrong, in which case my arguments will continue to fall on deaf ears. Carol, who has spent way too much time on this post but is tired of having her words distorted beyond recognition and arguments aimed at that supposed meaning instead of what she actually said From amiabledorsai at yahoo.com Mon Jan 30 22:50:12 2006 From: amiabledorsai at yahoo.com (amiabledorsai) Date: Mon, 30 Jan 2006 22:50:12 -0000 Subject: Snape, Voldemort, the prophecy (Re: VA/H=Mx13+RP? Snape's Culpability?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147317 > > Alla: > > > Do you think Snape thought prophecy had ANY meaning? > > > > Amiable Dorsai: > > Gee, what a silly thought--imagine going around > > and killing all the babies born at the end of July. > > fuzz876i: > Snape knew perfectly well what the prophecy meant even if he did > only hear half of it. As Dumbledore stated that it could have been > one of two, Harry or Neville. If Snape had heard the rest of the > prophecy then he would have known that Voldemort would Mark one > child as his equal. > > Why is it a silly thought killing all babies born in July? Herod > the king at the time of Christ's birth killed children 2 and under. > So why couldn't Voldemort kill all children and their families born > in July? IMO he needed the rest of the prophecy to tell him what > would happen by trying to kill the child. Amiable Dorsai: Note to self: Stop on way home tonight, and pick up supply of colons, hyphens, and right parentheses. Amiable Dorsai From stevejjen at earthlink.net Mon Jan 30 23:03:22 2006 From: stevejjen at earthlink.net (Jen Reese) Date: Mon, 30 Jan 2006 23:03:22 -0000 Subject: VA/H=Mx13+RP? Snape's Culpability? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147318 Carol: > As for the supposed lack of canon support for my position, I have > already given the evidence, but I'll repeat it in condensed > form. > 1) Dumbledore says that Snape could not possibly have known how > Voldemort would *interpret* the Prophecy, which implies that the > meaning of the Prophecy, even the portion that Snape reports, is > *not* self-evident. > 2) DD also points out that Snape had no way of knowing > who the unborn infant was even when he understood how LV > interpreted the Prophecy. > And 3) even Harry thinks that the logical thing for > Voldemort to do would be to wait and see which boy appeared to > present a threat rather than going after a baby. Jen: The way Dumbledore presented his case in defense of Snape has been reordered in the list above and I think the order is significant: 1) Snape had no way of knowing which child or parents would be targeted. He didn't know the parents would be people he knew. 2) Snape could not have known how Voldemort would interpret the prophecy. This fact comes **after** the first explanation, meaning what Snape could not forsee was that Voldemort would interpret the prophecy to refer to the Potters. Any other explanation discounts the first fact Dumbledore presented. I seriously doubt JKR is being vague here or switching back and forth between explanations because it's so crucial to the story. She wants Harry to know, via Dumbledore, that Snape's remorse is over the *people* Voldemort chose when he interpreted the prophecy, not that Voldemort intepreted the prophecy to be about a child. If JKR wanted Snape's remorse to be that an infant was targeted, or that he gave Voldemort the prophecy information without thinking what it meant, *she would have written those words into Dumbledore's mouth*. Interpreting the words in any other way requires speculation about young Snape we simply don't have. I'm all for speculation myself, love it and have engaged in it during this discussion. But if you take away all of our speculation about what Snape knew, or didn't know, or what kind of person he was at that age, or how quickly he got the info to Voldemort, or whether Dumbledore is misremembering the situation because he forgot what it was like to hear the prophecy for the first time, the ONLY thing left is his words, the order he put them in and the reason for Snape's remorse. Jen R. From bboyminn at yahoo.com Mon Jan 30 23:24:14 2006 From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Mon, 30 Jan 2006 23:24:14 -0000 Subject: Snape's Culpability? ...Was or Will Be Born In-Reply-To: <008b01c625e6$d10af5a0$14b2a8c0@rechnerchen> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147319 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Miles" wrote: > > lupinlore wrote: > > Why was Voldemort's reaction neither sane nor logical? Let's > > see, he's told that the one with the power to destroy him will > > be born as the seventh month wanes ... This means it can only > > be one of two possbilities. > > Miles: > This child was not born then. So nobody could know that there are > *only* two possibilities. You judge the situation by information > that neither Snape, Voldemort nor anyone had ... #147312 > fuzz876i: > Snape knew perfectly well what the prophecy meant even if he did > only hear half of it. As Dumbledore stated that it could have been > one of two, Harry or Neville. ... bboyminn: You are all ignoring a point which I stressed very strongly in several previous post. In that moment it is nothing more than an assumption that a child WILL BE born in the most recent occurance of the seventh month. The Prophecy doesn't say that at all. It simply says "Born as the seventh month dies". Not 'will be' born, and neither 'was' born; just 'born'. Evidence has come to light after the fact, in the many years that followed, that have lead Dumbledore to conclude that the Prophecy referred to either Neville or Harry, but neither Snape nor Voldemort could know that in the moment. And, indeed, Voldemort might have interpreted it wrong. Since the Prophecy merely says 'born' that could just as easily mean someone born 50 years ago or someone to be born 5 years in the future. Voldemort chose for the Prophecy to mean '/about to be/ born in the up-coming month of July'. As Dumbledore explained in the latest book, the Prophecy only has the meaning that Voldemort gives it. If Voldemort chose to ignore it as the rambling of a mad old fraud, then it would mean nothing. If Voldemort chose for the Prophecy to mean the pureblood Neville rather than the mixed-blood Harry, then that is what it would mean. In a sense, Voldemort didn't follow the Prophecy, he created it. He is the one that gave the mad pointless ramblings their meanings, and by assigning meaning to them, he maked them true. How could Snape possible predict all this in advance? How could Snape possibly know that Voldemort would choose the Potters instead of an annoying French waiter? The answer is, he couldn't. He couldn't possible have been able to work out in advance that Voldemort would decide the prophecy had significance, nor could he work out that Voldemort would decide that the significance was indeed the Potters. Any application of logic at this point, after a long string of assumptions, would have lead to the pureblood Longbottoms. In the moment that Snape received the Prophecy, it's significance spanned the entire lifetime of Voldemort, at least. It could have referred to anyone who had opposed Voldemort in any way at any time as long as they opposed him three times. The Prophecy could refer to the son or daughter of a Death Eater who had complained three times about how poorly thought out Voldemort's wacky schemes were. I still say we all see the significance of the Prophecy clearly because Dumbledore explained it all to us. But Dumbledore's insight comes from history. He has knowledge of circumstances that have already occurred from which to draw his conclusions on what Voldemort thought and what Voldemort chose. Snape, in the moment, does not have the luxury of that hindsight. The Prophecy when it was heard could mean anything, it could be interpreted in a nearly unlimited number of ways which certainly includes no significance at all. I really don't see how anyone can hold Snape responsible for the mad rambling conclusions of Voldemort. Certainly Snape has done his share of wrong, and has commited his share of crimes; he was a Death Eater after all. But to say that he could predict the full extent of Voldemort's conclusions relative to the Prophecy fragment seems beyond the pale. Yes, by passing the Prophecy fragment to Voldemort, Snape set a series of unpredictable events into motion, but I hardly see him any more to blame that the CIA agent who gathered info on Weapons of Mass Destruction and passed them on. That CIA agent couldn't possibly know in the moment that this information would be used as an immediate call to war by the President. Neither could Snape, predict or be held accountable for the decisions of his leader. In both cased the 'agent' knew that this was important information with /nasty/ potential, but it is their job to pass the information on, not to speculate on the /nasty/ potential lurking in the minds of their own leaders. Again, just trying to put things in perspective. Steve/bboyminn From MadameSSnape at aol.com Mon Jan 30 23:58:02 2006 From: MadameSSnape at aol.com (MadameSSnape at aol.com) Date: Mon, 30 Jan 2006 18:58:02 EST Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: VA/H=Mx13+RP? Snape's Culpability? Message-ID: <2d8.1a239ed.3110020a@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 147320 In a message dated 1/30/2006 6:39:14 A.M. Eastern Standard Time, ceridwennight at hotmail.com writes: I was wondering why everyone, not just LV, thought the prophecy child was a boy. Even Dumbledore thought so. Then I remembered, the prophecy specifically gives the child a gender: "And the Dark Lord will mark *him* as his equal, but *he* will have power the Dark Lord knows not..." http://www.hp- lexicon.org/wizards/voldemort.html ------------------ Sherrie here: BUT - that was in the part of the prophecy that Voldie never heard. Either Snape didn't hear it (as we & Harry are told), or (as some friends of mine & I have theorized) it was wiped from his memory. Either way, as far as Voldie was concerned, there was no gender specified in the prophecy. Sherrie (who would've also voted for Susan Bones, if she could have thought of her that early in the morning!) [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From foxmoth at qnet.com Tue Jan 31 00:19:19 2006 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2006 00:19:19 -0000 Subject: VA/H=Mx13+RP? Snape's Culpability? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147321 > Jen: We have canon straight from Dumbledore's mouth that Snape knew > the prophecy referred specifically to a child: "But he did not know-- > had no possible way of knowing--which boy Voldemort would hunt from > then onwards." (Seer Overheard, p. 512, Blooms.) > Dumbledore is telescoping events here. Voldemort could not possibly have decided to hunt Harry as soon as he heard the prophecy, since Harry had not even been born at the time. Pregnancy being what it is, Harry and Neville could as easily have been born a few days later, in August, and Voldemort would no doubt have decided the prophecy couldn't mean either of them. Think of this, too. Dumbledore has now conveyed the prophecy to Harry. If Harry gets himself killed trying to fulfill it, will his death be Dumbledore's fault? Surely not. Pippin From mrsewp at earthlink.net Tue Jan 31 00:59:51 2006 From: mrsewp at earthlink.net (Elizabeth Catherine) Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2006 00:59:51 -0000 Subject: VA/H=Mx13+RP? Snape's Culpability? In-Reply-To: <2d8.1a239ed.3110020a@aol.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147322 > In a message dated 1/30/2006 6:39:14 A.M. Eastern Standard Time, > ceridwennight at h... writes: I was wondering why everyone, not just LV, thought the prophecy child was a boy. Even Dumbledore thought so. EC did some snipping... Sherrie here: BUT - that was in the part of the prophecy that Voldie never heard. Either Snape didn't hear it (as we & Harry are told), or (as some friends of mine & I have theorized) it was wiped from his memory. Either way, as far as Voldie was concerned, there was no gender specified in the prophecy. Elizabeth C here: Well, the fact that Lord Thingy assumed the chosen one was a boy would just support common enough belief at the time... that women would not/could not be a serious/ legitimate threat. In looking at some of the scholarly articles re: gender in the Wizarding World (Excellent books: The Ivory Tower and Harry Potter and a host of others) even Hermione's scholarly feats are often juxtaposed with her "whimpers, crying in frustration, etc." (words are not exactly canon, mea culpa) One might argue that this continues to be the case in the Muggle World. In America, for example, the vitriol leveled at political women most always includes their fashion, figure, and haircuts (Hillary Clinton, Janet Reno, Madeline Albright to name a few). I suppose I could also mention some of the interesting (sic) press Cherie Blair rec'd. Of course you do have seemingly positive figures in McGonagall, Molly Weasly, Ginny, Madame Pomfrey. However, they are in subordinate roles to men more often. Even strong but deranged or misguided women (Bellatrix and Narcissa) are subordinate to men (husbands or LV). What do you all think? Trying to keep her politics out of discussion except when pertaining to theories about the Wizarding World view, Liz/ Elizabeth C From rkdas at charter.net Tue Jan 31 01:05:00 2006 From: rkdas at charter.net (susanbones2003) Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2006 01:05:00 -0000 Subject: The importance of death /Harry and Cedric In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147323 SNIPPED > Ceridwen: > And, as someone else pointed out, this was his first remembered > exposure to a dead body; Cedric was near Harry's age; Harry was > already emotionally on the edge as Sherry points out; somebody else > mentions that he also has to bring the body back to the Diggorys > which will be emotional in itself as he feels their grief; Cedric > isn't as close as Sirius, so the profanity of sharing the loss will > not be as great.SNIPPED > Ceridwen. > I have been reading this thread and wanting to add that when you are young and you experience a death of a classmate or another young person, sometimes it is more of a shocking realization that YES, people can die. I know Harry had lost his parents but he couldn't remember it. Cedric's death was real in the sense that he knew and liked Ced, but as many have said they weren't close. Still, the shock of his death hit Harry not perhaps for the sake of Cedric but in the way that terrible things hit kids. It was more about Harry at that point. Sirius, sadly enough, was the real deal. The heart-breaking loss kind of deal. I have just started reading HBP again and I do see Harry fighting to avoid thinking about Sirius, fighting anyone mentioning him. Then when Dumbledore talks to him in the Weasley's shed, it was extremely difficult for Harry. His eyes stung. He couldn't speak. He didn't want to face the loss of Sirius. So whoever has said that Sirius was a non-issue needs to read further. Life does go on and perhaps, mercifully, Harry doesn't dwell on the death constantly, but its effect is there, and can be felt. Harry said it best when he said Sirius wouldn't want him to crack up. And he tries his best not to. Jen D. From mmmwintersteiger at yahoo.com Mon Jan 30 22:56:07 2006 From: mmmwintersteiger at yahoo.com (mmmwintersteiger) Date: Mon, 30 Jan 2006 22:56:07 -0000 Subject: back to Blacks was Re: Snape and DD In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147324 Lolita: >If he had been > close to his Muggle father, why on earth would he join a movement > whose idea of fun was to torture Muggles? That is an excellent point, Lolita. I doubt Snape was close to his father either. (IMO) A magically-gifted Snape would have associated much more with his mother's family, whom I'm sure said absolutely nothing good about muggles-including his father. Ellen would have seen the potential of her son at a young age and I'm sure spent quite a bit of time early on teaching him about hexes and curses. Since Ellen was "cross and sullen" most of the time I am sure it was an attitude that Snape adopted as normalacy and it affected him throughout his years as a student as well as a professor at Hogwarts. La Gatta Lucianese: >he seems to have remained quite close with L.Malfoy...the two > of them are still rather chummy I am quite curious about this relationship. I am really hoping JKR goes into more detail here. As a younger man maybe L.Malfoy was a bit more open to half-bloods, saw how brilliant Snape was at even a young age and wanted to take him under his wing. I'm thinking they shared similar outlooks on life (dark, depressing outlooks) and easily bonded the way a mentor and his student would. Out of that bond grew true friendship-of course this is all speculation. I am thinking that this friendship has helped keep Snape a viable member of the DE and that L.Malfoy has vouched for him on more than one occasion. I am curious to see what happens to this relationship should Snape truely be loyal to DD. michelle From fuzz876i at yahoo.com Tue Jan 31 00:58:54 2006 From: fuzz876i at yahoo.com (fuzz876i) Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2006 00:58:54 -0000 Subject: Some Questions on Book 6 In-Reply-To: <20060130114927.67082.qmail@web33514.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147325 Ed wrote: > 2. Was the killing of Dumbledore by Snape a deliberate one or is just a front to continue his spying duty on Voldemoort? > Fuzz876i: Snape killed Dumbledore to keep his promise to Narcissa Draco's mother. He made the unbreakable vow to do what Malfoy was supposed to do if it looked like Malfoy would fail. To do this kind of spell they need a bonder or witness and that was Bellatrix Narcissa's sister. This took place in Snape's home in Spiner's end. Snape told Malfoy that he had made the unbreakable vow with his mother and that he neede to let him know what he was up to. Malfoy refused to tell him and told him he needed to break the vow because he needed no help. fuzz876i From kchuplis at alltel.net Tue Jan 31 01:47:47 2006 From: kchuplis at alltel.net (Karen Chuplis) Date: Mon, 30 Jan 2006 19:47:47 -0600 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: The importance of death /Harry and Cedric In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <946F5270-91FB-11DA-B488-000393B04DDE@alltel.net> No: HPFGUIDX 147326 On Monday, January 30, 2006, at 07:05 PM, susanbones2003 wrote: > Then when Dumbledore talks to him in the Weasley's > shed, it was extremely difficult for Harry. **His eyes stung. He > couldn't speak.**He didn't want to face the loss of Sirius. So whoever > has said that Sirius was a non-issue needs to read further. Life does > go on and perhaps, mercifully, Harry doesn't dwell on the death > constantly, but its effect is there, and can be felt. Harry said it > best when he said Sirius wouldn't want him to crack up. And he tries > his best not to. > Jen D. > There are often small comments like this in the narrative I think people miss. Some are very small and barely tossed in, but there. I think people miss those and then think Harry never feels anything. For instance in OoTP page 856: "He sat there for a long time, gazing out at the water, trying not to think about his godfather or to remember that it was directly across from here, on the opposite bank, that Sirius had collapsed trying to fend off a hundred dementors.... The sun had fallen before he realized that he was cold. He got up and returned to the castle, wiping his face on his sleeve as he went." I think that speaks so strongly of deep grief precisely because she doesn't say "Harry wept by the lake in deep grief over the loss of Sirius". Instead, she just tosses in a gesture. "wiping his face on his sleeve as he went". It's such a deep thing. Both in its indication of Harry's feelings and in this reflection of Harry as a boy, not the older Harry he is becoming. How many times have we seen a child wiping their face on their sleeve at a hurt? It's outstanding and if you don't see Harry as deeply grieving then I think maybe you are missing these small types of gestures in OoTP and in HBP. kchuplis From zgirnius at yahoo.com Tue Jan 31 02:27:17 2006 From: zgirnius at yahoo.com (zgirnius) Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2006 02:27:17 -0000 Subject: VA/H=Mx13+RP? Snape's Culpability? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147327 > Jen: The way Dumbledore presented his case in defense of Snape has > been reordered in the list above and I think the order is > significant: > > 1) Snape had no way of knowing which child or parents would be > targeted. He didn't know the parents would be people he knew. > > 2) Snape could not have known how Voldemort would interpret the > prophecy. This fact comes **after** the first explanation, meaning > what Snape could not forsee was that Voldemort would interpret the > prophecy to refer to the Potters. Any other explanation discounts > the first fact Dumbledore presented. > If JKR wanted Snape's remorse to be that an infant was targeted, or > that he gave Voldemort the prophecy information without thinking > what it meant, *she would have written those words into Dumbledore's > mouth*. zgirnius: While the order and the words were of course chosen by Rowling, she put them in Dumbledore's mouth. So we might consider why HE would make the statements in the order in which they were made. And he might have stressed the first point to impress on Harry that it was certainly not out of his animus for Harry's parents that Snape reported the prophecy to Voldemort. Since he could not possibly have known who would be the target of Voldemort. From katmac at katmac.cncdsl.com Tue Jan 31 02:36:03 2006 From: katmac at katmac.cncdsl.com (lagattalucianese) Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2006 02:36:03 -0000 Subject: The ancient and most noble house of Black In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147328 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "jlv230" wrote: > > Did anyone see the partial view of the Black family tree drawn by JKR > for a charity auction? It is very interesting - for example you can > make out that a Son of Phineas Nigellus married Violetta Bulstrode, > and their Daughter Dorea, born in 1920, married a Charlus Potter and > they had one son (James?). I wonder why Harry never noticed... > La Gatta Lucianese: Probably because Dorea and Charles Potter weren't Harry's grandparents. (See my post #147285 on the subject.) > > I hope we'll be able to see the full picture soon. It is amazing to > see how closely connected the wizarding world is. > > JLV xx > La Gatta Lucianese: You can. There's a reproduction of it in The Harry Potter Lexicon, under "The Black Family Tree". In response to Lolita: > > ...and being stuck with 15 year-olds or people (at least) > twice his age for better part of 15ish years didn't help Snape's > emotional maturation either. > La Gatta Lucianese: Dumbledore's relationship with Snape (and McGonagall's too; I wish JKR showed us more of it) is definitely more "in loco parentis" than colleague to colleague. Snape, even as an adult, doesn't seem to have any close friends among his agemates (I don't think you could describe Lucius Malfoy as a close friend, by any stretch of the imagination). Maybe what drove Snape into the arms of the Death Eaters after he left Hogwarts was simply loneliness. From quick_silver71 at yahoo.ca Tue Jan 31 02:46:43 2006 From: quick_silver71 at yahoo.ca (quick_silver71) Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2006 02:46:43 -0000 Subject: Snape's Culpability? ...Was or Will Be Born In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147329 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Steve" wrote: > I really don't see how anyone can hold Snape responsible for the mad > rambling conclusions of Voldemort. Certainly Snape has done his share > of wrong, and has commited his share of crimes; he was a Death Eater > after all. But to say that he could predict the full extent of > Voldemort's conclusions relative to the Prophecy fragment seems beyond > the pale. > > Yes, by passing the Prophecy fragment to Voldemort, Snape set a series > of unpredictable events into motion, but I hardly see him any more to > blame that the CIA agent who gathered info on Weapons of Mass > Destruction and passed them on. > > That CIA agent couldn't possibly know in the moment that this > information would be used as an immediate call to war by the > President. Neither could Snape, predict or be held accountable for the > decisions of his leader. In both cased the 'agent' knew that this was > important information with /nasty/ potential, but it is their job to > pass the information on, not to speculate on the /nasty/ potential > lurking in the minds of their own leaders. > > Again, just trying to put things in perspective. > > Steve/bboyminn > If I may add something to this argument...isn't the whole point of DDM!Snape that Snape feels "responsible" for the death of the Potters? Isn't the reason that Snape felt his "deepest remorse" because his actions resulted in their being targetted and their deaths? To say that Snape in the grand scheme of things isn't really that responsible is great but on a deep, personal level Snape passing the prophecy and the results of those actions shook Snape's world to it's core and altered his path in life. So I think that Snape feels that he is responsible for the deaths of the Potters (at least if he's DDM). Quick_Silver From richter at ridgenet.net Tue Jan 31 03:25:02 2006 From: richter at ridgenet.net (richter_kuymal) Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2006 03:25:02 -0000 Subject: lupin, werewolves & "wagga wagga" Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147330 Way back in Cos, we have Lockhart "demonstrating" his dealing with the "wagga wagga werewolf". YES, Lockhart's a fraud. However, he admits that OTHER wizards/witches did the things he claims as his own. In this case, use of "the immensely complex Homophus Charm" (COS pg 162 scholastic edition) to turn a werewolf back into a man. So the question is: LV is offering werewolves "rights" (AS werewolves). Is Lupin offering them Wolfsbane Potion (which only helps control the episodes) or would it be possible to offer them the immensely complex Homophus Charm and a cure? If being a werewolf is a disease then some would want the cure. Others, who have over the years become as sociopathic as Greyback would reject both the potion and the charm. Any chance this issue will come up in Book 7? PAR From exodusts at yahoo.com Tue Jan 31 03:58:44 2006 From: exodusts at yahoo.com (exodusts) Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2006 03:58:44 -0000 Subject: Regulus Black / Significance of DD & Sirius having brothers In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147331 Alla: > So, if not to show Aberworth and Regulus as complete opposites of > Albus and Sirius ( imagine that this is the case), what do you > think is the plot significance of them being in the picture at all? > > I mean, Regulus sure seems to get a nice, if secondary storyline, > but in terms of him being Sirius' brother and Aberworth being Albus > brother, I just don't see how important that could be, when book 7 > has so much to deal with. > > I guess I can sort of see them offering help to Harry in his quest, > sort of substituting for Sirius and Albus, but would not that be > easier and less convoluted not to kill off Albus and Sirius in the > first place? > I think the main reason they were killed off is to serve the drama, see HBP Ch 30: "And Harry saw very clearly as be sat there under the hot sun how people who cared about him had stood in front of him one by one, his mother, his father, his godfather, and finally Dumbledore, all determined to protect him; but now that was over. He could not let anybody else stand between him and Voldemort; he must abandon for ever the illusion he ought to have lost at the age of one: that the shelter of a parent's arms meant that nothing could hurt him. There was no waking from his nightmare, no comforting whisper in the dark that he was safe really, that it was all in his imagination; the last and greatest of his protectors had died and he was more alone than he had ever been before." Regarding Regulus Black, I think one reason JKR put him into the story is as yet another clue-hinted plot-twist. He was clearly foreshadowed in OotP as Sirius-doppleganger Stubby Boardman (someone on this list, I can't remember her name, even picked that up when OotP was released, without even needing the extra hints of his importance from "R.A.B." in HBP). Frankly, I'm amazed this hasn't been more widely publicized. Regulus Black means "Little King Black". Where would you find a little black king, apart from on a chessboard (and we know wizards enjoy chess)? So he becomes a stubby (little) board man. We have Dumbledore telling Draco that he can't be found if he is "dead". There are no other dead Death Eater turncoats (Karkaroff just ran away) we know about, apart from Regulus Black. Who else can DD be talking about (only Emmeline Vance, IF her death was faked to give Snape extra mole points with Voldemort)? We know R.A.B. is vital to Book 7, and we are certain R.A.B. is Regulus Black. We guess he was about the same age as Harry when he sailed across the Inferius- infested lake with an adult accomplice (Caradoc Dearborn)? THEN JKR drops into HBP that 6th year students learn how to brew the Draught of Living Death (page 10 of their Potions textbook). The only question is how Harry will find Regulus. My guess is that Zacharias Smith, withdrawn from Hogwarts by his father, lives in Little Norton, and that Harry will be going to see him in book 7. While he is there, he will bump into one of the neighbours and be momentarily shocked into thinking he is seeing Sirius' ghost. exodusts From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Tue Jan 31 04:19:13 2006 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2006 04:19:13 -0000 Subject: Snape's remorse (Was: DD and Snape's Culpability) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147332 Potioncat wrote: > I agree with Steve, as stated somewhere upthread: from the first part of the prophecy, there is no way to tell it's about a baby. The one approaches may mean that an adult wizard is getting closer to his > attack on LV. It could have meant a grown man with a July birthday > whose parents had defied LV. LV had been around long enough for that. > > So that Snape would not have a strong reason to expect it was about a young woman and her child. Carol responds: Exactly. Potioncat: > But, here's my real concern, did DD know that Snape was a DE that day > when Snape overheard the prophecy? If he did, why did he let him go? > Surely DD knew Snape would go straight to LV. If he didn't know, why > didn't DD take some action just to keep the prophecy a secret in > general? Carol responds: Interesting. I don't think DD knew, or surely he would have prevented young Snape from leaving. Stunned him or something. Unless he somehow thought he could protect the Chosen One or thought it would somehow be good for LV to hear part of the Prophecy? Since I don't believe in Puppetmaster!Dumbledore, I can't imagine him allowing that to happen. He must not have known that Snape was a DE. So when Snape came to confess to DD that he had revealed the Prophecy to LV, he would first have to confess that he was a Death Eater. Just those two confessions in themselves would have taken great courage and would have been a step toward DD's trusting Snape. And if Snape also knew at that point that the Potters were involved (which he could not have known until after Harry was born, some months after the Prophecy was overheard), DD would have had still more reason to trust him because he (Snape) was trying to protect an enemy (James Potter), which a Snape who was loyal to Voldemort surely would not do. But a disillusioned Snape who had found out that being a DE was not about glory (or recognition for his many talents, which I think he failed to receive from Dumbledore and hoped to gain from Voldemort) would have had a reason to go to DD. (Quite possibly he had also witnessed the DE execution of another disillusioned young Death Eater, Regulus Black. If they were friends, as I suspect, Regulus's death was another reason to transfer his loyalty from LV to Dumbledore, and another reason for DD to believe him sincere.) BTW, I don't think he felt remorse at this point since there was nothing to feel remorse about (regret, even repentance, but not remorse, which is a horrible, soul-wrenching emotion combining grief and guilt). The Potters weren't dead and he was trying (IMO) to prevent their deaths by *returning* to DD's side and spying on LV. The remorse, IMO, came later, after the confession and the spying and whatever else he tried to do failed to save the Potters. And that remorse for his role in the death of an enemy and his innocent wife, as well as for the orphaning of their child is what convinced DD that Snape was to be trusted--*after* Snape had already been risking his life by spying on LV for perhaps a year or more. Snape may be a great actor, but even he can't feign the soul-wrenching anguish of remorse, as opposed to penitence, which can be faked. Merriam-Webster: REMORSE suggests prolonged and insistent self-reproach and mental anguish for past wrongs and especially for those whose consequences cannot be remedied. If I'm not mistaken, Snape is again feeling the mental hell symbolized by the howling dog in HBP. And this time, there's no Dumbledore to go to for solace. Carol, still certain that an AK is not the only spell that gives off a green light, but that's another topic so I won't go there From renata_souza_e_souza at yahoo.com.br Mon Jan 30 22:06:59 2006 From: renata_souza_e_souza at yahoo.com.br (Renata Souza) Date: Mon, 30 Jan 2006 22:06:59 -0000 Subject: Some Questions on Book 6 In-Reply-To: <20060130114927.67082.qmail@web33514.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147333 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Ed wrote: > > Hello There!! > > I'm actually a new member of this group, and yes, I am a great fan of Harry Potter. I have just actually finished Book 6: the Half Blood Prince and was quite stunned that Snape murdered Dumbledore. > > Can anyone tell me if: > > 1. Dumbledore is really dead or would be returning back in the last Book (I hope so)? > 2. Was the killing of Dumbledore by Snape a deliberate one or is just a front to continue his spying duty on Voldemort? > > Looking forward to hear your views and comments!! > > ed9743621 > Hi Ed! I'll give my opinion only about #1: I think dumbledore has to be really dead, because otherwise, Snape would be, because of the unbreakable vow. Reneta Souza From brahadambal at indiatimes.com Tue Jan 31 03:25:04 2006 From: brahadambal at indiatimes.com (latha279) Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2006 03:25:04 -0000 Subject: DD and Snape's Culpability In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147334 Steve: Again, you think you know the proper interpretation of the Prophecy because Dumbledore explained it all to you, but if you look at it objectively, there is virtually no way to know it refers to the Potters and there about-to-be-born son. Alla: What I do NOT find logical is that Snape did not work out that Prophecy talks about ANY couple who gave birth to the baby who has a power to defeat Voldemort. I just find it THAT clear. I understand we disagree on that one, but that is what I think. Potioncat: I agree with Steve, as stated somewhere upthread: from the first part of the prophecy, there is no way to tell it's about a baby. The one approaches may mean that an adult wizard is getting closer to his attack on LV. It could have meant a grown man with a July birthday whose parents had defied LV. LV had been around long enough for that. So that Snape would not have a strong reason to expect it was about a young woman and her child. He was a DE and should have been held accountable for his actions. Which I think he was by DD. My timeline may be off, but I think it's significant that Regulus and Severus came to a parting of the DE way at about the same time. We also have Sirius's statement that in the beginning, the WW didn't understand what LV was up to. But, here's my real concern, did DD know that Snape was a DE that day when Snape overheard the prophecy? If he did, why did he let him go? Surely DD knew Snape would go straight to LV. If he didn't know, why didn't DD take some action just to keep the prophecy a secret in general? brady: I think this is easily answered. DD, for one, is not a great believer in prophecies. Secondly, DD had heard the entire prophecy and knew what would/can happen if LV chooses to attack anybody. Third, DD was curious to know what interpretation LV makes out of it. I also have a feeling that Snape knows the complete prophecy. He only told LV what DD told him to tell. This is going by the assumption that DD knew that Snape was a DE and also assuming that Snape became a DDM! soon afterwards. my tuppence. brady. From katmac at katmac.cncdsl.com Tue Jan 31 04:29:43 2006 From: katmac at katmac.cncdsl.com (lagattalucianese) Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2006 04:29:43 -0000 Subject: Black Family Tree *possible spoilers* In-Reply-To: <003801c62467$b425ded0$14b2a8c0@rechnerchen> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147335 > > Miles: > But Sirius told us (in OotP) that all pureblood families are interrelated. > So Harry is a distant "cousin" of Ron, Draco and Harry are distant > relatives, Sirius is kind of an "uncle" for Harry... > I do not see the new details of the Black family tree as a surprise, and I > doubt they will be important. James Potter was a descendant of an ancient > family of the WW, so according to Sirius' statement he is somehow related to > all/most non-muggleborn wizards. Where's the news? > > Miles > La Gatta Lucianese: To see where this sort of thing can lead if people really apply themselves, check out the following: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_II_of_Spain Let's hear it for hybrid (and Muggle-born) vigor! It encourages me no end that Harry's mother was a mudblood! From bartl at sprynet.com Tue Jan 31 04:45:50 2006 From: bartl at sprynet.com (Bart Lidofsky) Date: Mon, 30 Jan 2006 23:45:50 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Will there be an ESE!character in Book 7? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <43DEEB7E.50804@sprynet.com> No: HPFGUIDX 147336 Michelle: > IMO-There is no way it's Neville, he's had too much personal trauma > and wouldn't cause that kind of pain to another, especially a friend. Bart: Ah, but a lot of pain and frustration creates a weakness that can be taken advantage of. Make Neville think that he is going to get revenge on Voldemort, while corrupting him one step at a time. What have the good guys done for him? His parents are insane shells, and his grandmother is a domineering bitch. Even his classmates have little respect for him. Bart From stevejjen at earthlink.net Tue Jan 31 05:03:02 2006 From: stevejjen at earthlink.net (Jen Reese) Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2006 05:03:02 -0000 Subject: VA/H=Mx13+RP? Snape's Culpability? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147337 Pippin: > Think of this, too. Dumbledore has now conveyed the prophecy to > Harry. If Harry gets himself killed trying to fulfill it, will his > death be Dumbledore's fault? Surely not. Jen: I rearranged the post just to be very clear up front I'm not arguing the issue of Snape vs. Peter here. My own opinion is that Peter and Voldemort were primarily responsible for the Potters deaths. Nothing else to add on that point from me. Pippin: > Dumbledore is telescoping events here. Voldemort could not possibly > have decided to hunt Harry as soon as he heard the prophecy, since > Harry had not even been born at the time. Pregnancy being what it is, > Harry and Neville could as easily have been born a few days later, > in August, and Voldemort would no doubt have decided the prophecy > couldn't mean either of them. Jen: See, here's what I don't understand. You say Dumbledore is telescoping, Steve mentioned Dumbledore is basing his interpretation 'after the fact, but we must look at what Snape knew in the moment,' Carol said: "And in the limited time available, he could not have come to his own tentative understanding of what the partial Prophecy might mean, much less anticipate how Voldemort would interpret it and choose to act on it. Canon *does* support that interpretation--unless you choose to believe that Dumbledore is wrong, in which case my arguments will continue to fall on deaf ears." So far most people don't seem to believe Dumbledore said exactly what he meant and meant what he said: Snape knew *a* child was involved when he overheard the prophecy. Not Harry, *a* child. Why is it so hard to take Dumbledore's words at face value here, so difficult to believe Snape understood the part of the prophecy he overheard but didn't know who it referred to? That his remorse came AFTER he learned how Voldemort interpreted the prophecy to mean he would target the Potters? I'm pretty much a DDM!Snape person (with some wavering) and believe it's perfectly possible Snape understood *generally* the information he was delivering to Voldemort because such a scenario could tell us more about Snape's characterization and arc: At that time in his life he may have put great value on the sort of thing Draco mentioned valuing in HBP--glory, honor above other DE's, praise from Voldemort. If so, then Voldemort's interpretation caused a monumental shift in Snape. Before the revelation Snape was not concerned by who would be affected even if it was a child, but after Voldemort's interpretation he was MOVED to feel great remorse, a signal that whatever humanity he may have submerged to serve Voldemort had opened up inside him again. I think that's a valid interpretation even if people don't agree with it. It fits the way we've seen DE's talk about and to Voldemort, it fits with Snape because he is able to compartmentalize his feelings if he learned Occlumency as well as he did. Personally it fits better for me than some other explanations because it allows for how Snape was able to be a DE by shutting down his humanity and that once he was able to feel remorse again for his actions, he channelled that same compartmentalization into something useful by learning Occlumencey and becoming a superlative spy. The other intepretation lends itself to the good little soldier who simply repeats what he learned to his superior. If someone wants me to drag up canon for why I don't see Snape fitting this mold, I gladly will. zgirnius: > While the order and the words were of course chosen by Rowling, she > put them in Dumbledore's mouth. So we might consider why HE would > make the statements in the order in which they were made. And he > might have stressed the first point to impress on Harry that it was > certainly not out of his animus for Harry's parents that Snape > reported the prophecy to Voldemort. Since he could not possibly have > known who would be the target of Voldemort. Jen: That's true. I'm not sure what that says about the whole issue of whether Snape understood the part he did overhear? But then my brain is fried at the moment and I'm going to call it a night . Jen R. From zgirnius at yahoo.com Tue Jan 31 05:23:15 2006 From: zgirnius at yahoo.com (zgirnius) Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2006 05:23:15 -0000 Subject: Green lights in spells In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147338 Carol: > Carol, still certain that an AK is not the only spell that gives off a > green light, but that's another topic so I won't go there zgirnius: Well, you are absolutely right. When Ron tries to jinx Draco in CoS, his (broken) wand backfires and causes a jet of green light to hit him. The result is that he starts to vomit up slugs. Also, in GoF after the Quidditch World Cup, when the Death Eaters show up at the campsite, there are flashes of green light. Since noone (including the newspapers) mention any use of the Unforgivables in that incident, I do not think this was a Killing Curse being cast. It was likely the levitation spell used by the Death Eaters to torment the unfortunate Muggle caretaker and his family. From vjmerri at iquest.net Tue Jan 31 05:49:44 2006 From: vjmerri at iquest.net (Vicki Merriman) Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2006 05:49:44 -0000 Subject: Will there be an ESE!character in Book 7? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147339 agreed that it can't be neville. Harry gets protection from spending some part of the holidays with family, specifically his mother's family. I think Dudley is right up there for the role of betrayer, but even more so, I think Ron is, somewhat inadvertently but still. . . the old slippery slope. Ron is his best friend, but he constantly resents the extra attention harry gets. And Dudley is a no brainer. He'd cough up harry for a box of candy, and never realize he was also coughing up his family snd himself at the same time. --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "mmmwintersteiger" wrote: > > Magda: > >I assume that Harry will undergo a personal betrayal in Book > > >7> > > Bart: > >It's probably going to be Neville> > > Michelle: > IMO-There is no way it's Neville, he's had too much personal trauma > and wouldn't cause that kind of pain to another, especially a friend. > I think it will be someone in the OOTP or possibly a Hogwarts > professor. I have my suspicions on who it would be but it is all just > based on my gut feelings and nothing concrete. > > On the other hand, I do think Neville is going to be a very important > and pivotal character in book 7 > > Michelle > From gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk Tue Jan 31 07:46:10 2006 From: gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk (Geoff Bannister) Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2006 07:46:10 -0000 Subject: Some Questions on Book 6 In-Reply-To: <20060130114927.67082.qmail@web33514.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147340 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Ed wrote: ed9743621: > Hello There!! > > I'm actually a new member of this group, and yes, I am a great fan of Harry Potter. I have just actually finished Book 6: the Half Blood Prince and was quite stunned that Snape murdered Dumbledore. > > Can anyone tell me if: > > 1. Dumbledore is really dead or would be returning back in the last Book (I hope so)? > 2. Was the killing of Dumbledore by Snape a deliberate one or is just a front to continue his spying duty on Voldemort? > > Looking forward to hear your views and comments!! Geoff: Welcome to the madhouse. :-)) This has been a topic which has generated a huge amount of debate since HBP came out. One way you could tackle it would be to go to the point when the group re-opened after the closure from July 15-19 over the weekend when the book was published. Pick up from message 132907 and skip through the list from there onwards. I think you'll find a fair bit to keep you occupied.... From bboyminn at yahoo.com Tue Jan 31 08:12:28 2006 From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2006 08:12:28 -0000 Subject: lupin, werewolves & "wagga wagga" In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147341 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "richter_kuymal" wrote: > > ... in Cos, we have Lockhart "demonstrating" ... "the immensely > complex Homophus Charm" .. to turn a werewolf back into a man. > So the question is: > LV is offering werewolves "rights" (AS werewolves). Is Lupin > offering them Wolfsbane Potion ... or would it be possible to > offer them the immensely complex Homophus Charm and a cure? > bboyminn: Here is the problem with the Homophus Charm, we don't actually know what it does. I has been speculated, given that it is not offered as a cure, that the Charm is very short term. That is, it maybe last for only a few minutes which would be enough to stop an imminent attack. It would also be enough time to identify the werewolf's human form and thereby, in essense, throw him out of the village. Additionally, a few minutes of 'human' time might be enough time to restrain the werewolf until his episode passed. This has been the most common speculation on the subject that I have seen on the web. So, the Homophus Charm is not a cure or treatment for a werewolf. At best, it is a short term defensive measure that is used against them. > PAR: > > If being a werewolf is a disease then some would want the cure. > Others, who have over the years become as sociopathic as Greyback > would reject both the potion and the charm. Any chance this issue > will come up in Book 7? > > PAR bboyminn: That is very difficult to determine. JKR has so many unresolved plot threads hanging it's hard to believe she can resolve them all in only one book. I do think that Remus Lupin will have a more promenent role in helping Harry and that might bring his fate into the story as a very deep background story. But beyond that, other than maybe a note at the end, I don't think the issue will be dealt with. JKR simply doesn't have the time in only one book to cover all these side issues. Just a thought. Steve/bboyminn From drednort at alphalink.com.au Tue Jan 31 08:50:19 2006 From: drednort at alphalink.com.au (Shaun Hately) Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2006 19:50:19 +1100 Subject: ADMIN: Strange messages and computer viruses Message-ID: <43DFBF7B.5534.5732AB@drednort.alphalink.com.au> No: HPFGUIDX 147342 Greetings from Hexquarters! At least some people have noticed some rather odd messages appearing on HPForGrownups recently - messages with strange or meaningless subject headings, that contain either no text or very little text and often a notice that says: [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] These messages are nearly always the product of one of a number of e- mail viruses that are circulating around the internet at any time. These e-mail viruses reproduce themselves by e-mail. The way they typically work is that they raid the address book of the e-mail program of an infected computer and send e-mails that look like they come from one of the addresses in that address book to other addresses in that address book. This means that they appear to come from someone who almost certainly did not send them and has no control over the fact they have been sent. But because that address may be that of a member of this list, yahoogroups allows the message to get onto the list, thinking it must be a message from the person whose name appears on it. This list is set up to strip off any attachments to e-mails, so the virus never reaches this list and you cannot become infected by the messages on this list for that reason. They are annoying, but they are not dangerous. However, there are plenty of other ways that such a message could infect you - the virus could send itself as if it came from the HPForGrownups at yahoogroups.com address if that is in the address book of an infected computer, for example, and it could be sent to you from anyone who has your address in their address book. So it is very important that all users of Windows based computers have up to date anti-virus software installed on their computer. While viruses can be written for non-Windows computers, they are much rarer, so this is most important for Windows users. There are a wide range of anti-virus products available and it is not our place to suggest which one you should use. But there is an anti- virus program called AVG which is available free to home users at: http://free.grisoft.com/doc/1 that is certainly worth looking at if you have no other protection. Shaun AKA Crikey Elf For the List Elves From rkdas at charter.net Tue Jan 31 12:26:08 2006 From: rkdas at charter.net (susanbones2003) Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2006 12:26:08 -0000 Subject: The importance of death /Harry and Cedric In-Reply-To: <946F5270-91FB-11DA-B488-000393B04DDE@alltel.net> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147343 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Karen Chuplis wrote: Karen wrote: > > > > There are often small comments like this in the narrative I think > people miss. Some are very small and barely tossed in, but there. I > think people miss those and then think Harry never feels anything. For > instance in OoTP page 856: > > "He sat there for a long time, gazing out at the water, trying not to > think about his godfather or to remember that it was directly across > from here, on the opposite bank, that Sirius had collapsed trying to > fend off a hundred dementors.... > > The sun had fallen before he realized that he was cold. He got up and > returned to the castle, wiping his face on his sleeve as he went." > > I think that speaks so strongly of deep grief precisely because she > doesn't say "Harry wept by the lake in deep grief over the loss of > Sirius". Instead, she just tosses in a gesture. "wiping his face on his > sleeve as he went". It's such a deep thing. SNIPPED> Jen writes: You can not imagine how this little throw-away bit tore at my heart when I first read it. As you said it was a such a small thing. No huge signposts, no self-serving scenes that manipulate you. Just quiet words that demonstrate so much more. Karen again:> How many times have we seen a child wiping > their face on their sleeve at a hurt? It's outstanding and if you don't > see Harry as deeply grieving then I think maybe you are missing these > small types of gestures in OoTP and in HBP. > > kchuplis From kelleyaynn at yahoo.com Tue Jan 31 13:55:56 2006 From: kelleyaynn at yahoo.com (kelleyaynn) Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2006 13:55:56 -0000 Subject: Thestrals be the key / Owls In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147344 > Interesting point of view. You seem to be inferring that someone's > animagus is a thestral. Would that even be possible? It seems > that thestrals are magical animals, like a unicorn. I don't know > if you could have an animagus that is a magical creature. > Kelleyaynn: Since it is possible for one's patronus to be magical (e.g. Dumbledore's phoenix), it seems possible to me that one's animagus could be a magical creature. But having the actual magical powers of that creature? Maybe not. Even when an animagus transforms into his or her non-magical animal, they are still really themselves, just in a different physical body. From agdisney at msn.com Tue Jan 31 14:07:02 2006 From: agdisney at msn.com (Andrea Grevera) Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2006 09:07:02 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Thestrals be the key / Owls References: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147345 Kelleyaynn: Since it is possible for one's patronus to be magical (e.g. Dumbledore's phoenix), it seems possible to me that one's animagus could be a magical creature. But having the actual magical powers of that creature? Maybe not. Even when an animagus transforms into his or her non-magical animal, they are still really themselves, just in a different physical body. Andie: If it was really that easy don't you think DD would have used either owls or thestrals? I personally think that Harry & Harry alone is going to be able to find & destroy the remaining horcruxes without any permanent damage to himself. There has to be something with his connection to LV that will protect him when he destroys the horcruxes. I'm not saying Harry is a horcrux because I don't believe that at all, I just feel that the powers LV transferred to Harry will enable Harry to find & destroy the remaining bits of LV's soul. Harry will need & take all the help he can get to figure out where the remaining horcruxes are but the actual destruction of them will be done by Harry & he will be able to do this without suffering any physical or mental damage to himself. I think that if Harry had drunk the potion in the cave he would have survived it the same way LV would have survived if he had gone back for the horcrux himself. LV is going to make sure he will be able to retrieve the horcruxes himself if he needs to without it killing him, so with the transfer of powers to Harry, I think Harry will have the same ability. However RAB left the potion, I'm sure it wouldn't have been harmful to LV because RAB wanted to be sure LV understood that the horcrux was gone and that RAB was the one to remove it. Andie [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From agdisney at msn.com Tue Jan 31 14:19:32 2006 From: agdisney at msn.com (Andrea Grevera) Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2006 09:19:32 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Locket in Black house References: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147346 > La Gatta Lucianese: > It [locket] was tossed into the rubbish sack, along with the > other odds and ends from the drawing-room cabinets (OotP.6). If > it was retrieved by Kreacher, it wasn't in his lair under the > boiler when Hermione delivered his Christmas present (OotP.23). And does it matter? If RAB found it, surely he would have destroyed the bit of soul living inside it? JKR doesn't really say what has to be done to the Horcruxes to rid them of Voldy, so maybe it's just enough that RAB found it and did something with it? Not sure.. Judi Andie: I don't think that anything was done with the locket after RAB found it. Paraphrase (I don't have the book with me), but, they tried opening the locket and couldn't . Since they couldn't open it, they through it in the garbage. If the horcrux was released from the locket, there should not have been a problem opening it. If as stated DD suspected the locket to be a horcrux, during all his visits to #12 don't you expect somewhere in conversations that the sealed locket might come up. Just in passing conversation. We don't hear all conversations that go on but since Molly was concentrating on cleaning & making sure everyone available was helping someone had to mention all of the 'dark' objects that they were finding. I guess DD wasn't interested in the daily happenings. Before posting to any list, you MUST read the group's Admin File! http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/files/Admin_Files/HBF_Text__MUST_READ Please use accurate subject headings and snip unnecessary material from posts to which you're replying! Yahoo! Groups Links [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk Tue Jan 31 14:15:58 2006 From: gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk (Geoff Bannister) Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2006 14:15:58 -0000 Subject: The importance of death /Harry and Cedric In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147347 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "susanbones2003" wrote: > > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Karen Chuplis > wrote: Karen: > > I think that speaks so strongly of deep grief precisely because > she > > doesn't say "Harry wept by the lake in deep grief over the loss of > > Sirius". Instead, she just tosses in a gesture. "wiping his face > on his > > sleeve as he went". It's such a deep thing. SNIPPED> Jen: > You can not imagine how this little throw-away bit tore at my heart > when I first read it. As you said it was a such a small thing. No > huge signposts, no self-serving scenes that manipulate you. Just > quiet words that demonstrate so much more. Karen: > How many times have we seen a child wiping > > their face on their sleeve at a hurt? It's outstanding and if you > don't > > see Harry as deeply grieving then I think maybe you are missing > these > > small types of gestures in OoTP and in HBP. Geoff: I also find this very moving being a male who grew up in the "boys don't cry" era. I can remember a little over twenty years ago when my mother died having to confide six months later in a close friend that I was worried because I didn't feel that I had grieved for her. But the piece of writing which always gets to me on this issue is: 'The thing against which he had been fighting on and off ever since he had come out of the maze was threatening to overpower him. He could feel a burning, prickling feeling in the inner corners of his eyes. He blinked and stared up at the ceiling. "It wasn't your fault, Harry," Mrs.Weasley whispered. "I told him to take the Cup with me," said Harry. Now the burning feeling was in his throat, too. He wished Ron would look away. Mrs.Weasley set the potion down on the bedside cabinet, bent down and put her arms around Harry. He had no memory of ever being hugged like this, as though by a mother. The full weight of everything he had seen that night seemed to fall in upon him as Mrs.Weasley held him to her. His mother's face, his father's voice, the sight of Cedric dead on the ground, all started spinning in his head until he could hardly bear it, until he was screwing up his face against the howl of misery fighting to get out of him.' (GOF "The Parting of the Ways" pp.619-620 UK edition) That I know how true can be - fighting to avoid crying and keeping a stiff upper lip. From kchuplis at alltel.net Tue Jan 31 14:39:34 2006 From: kchuplis at alltel.net (Karen) Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2006 08:39:34 -0600 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: The importance of death /Harry and Cedric References: Message-ID: <00a401c62674$277a5bf0$b301010a@ConsolidatedTelephone.local> No: HPFGUIDX 147349 Karen: > How many times have we seen a child wiping > > their face on their sleeve at a hurt? It's outstanding and if you > don't > > see Harry as deeply grieving then I think maybe you are missing > these > > small types of gestures in OoTP and in HBP. Geoff: I also find this very moving being a male who grew up in the "boys don't cry" era. I can remember a little over twenty years ago when my mother died having to confide six months later in a close friend that I was worried because I didn't feel that I had grieved for her. But the piece of writing which always gets to me on this issue is: 'The thing against which he had been fighting on and off ever since he had come out of the maze was threatening to overpower him. He could feel a burning, prickling feeling in the inner corners of his eyes. He blinked and stared up at the ceiling. "It wasn't your fault, Harry," Mrs.Weasley whispered. (snip) (GOF "The Parting of the Ways" pp.619-620 UK edition) That I know how true can be - fighting to avoid crying and keeping a stiff upper lip. kchuplis: Oh yes, that scene really kills me too. Interestingly enough, last night on the Craig Ferguson show, he had a wake for his father who passed away this weekend. It was a fantastic show. It was really all about grief and how we process it. He had a grief counselor on and Amy Yasbeck his friend and the recent widow of John Ritter. Craig mentioned how he feels embarrassed by his emotions even, being a man, just as we've been discussing here, and the doctor talked about how that is common as is the guilt people sometimes feel that they are *not* more overt in their expression of grief. However, it is so difficult for our minds to go there that it is just another mechanism by which we cope, but that our human connections are the narrative of our lives and we will go there to keep that connection but the thing that I went "BING BING! Yes, that's exactly it" but that I didn't describe well the other day is how when we are seriously grieved over a close loss like a parent or child or sibling is that grief is like this connection, this little container that is all your own and you don't want to share it or give it away to anyone else. Amy Yasbeck was saying people come to you and say with concern "how are you doing" but you don't wan't to talk about it, you don't want to give that piece of you, that connection you have with the person who died, away to anyone. I think that is a perfect description. It is like your last connection with this person and though you might have moments in private where you let your emotion go, that grief is this "MY" thing and you really feel like to give it away to others is somehow losing more of that person. I know that is how I felt, I just didn't ever think of it in those terms and I think JKR caught it really well with Harry, no doubt due to her experience of losing her mother. In fact, I'm really becoming more and more amazed at how well she has written about grief without any overtness. From littleleah at handbag.com Tue Jan 31 14:55:37 2006 From: littleleah at handbag.com (littleleahstill) Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2006 14:55:37 -0000 Subject: VA/H=Mx13+RP? Snape's Culpability? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147350 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Elizabeth Catherine" wrote: > > > > In a message dated 1/30/2006 6:39:14 A.M. Eastern Standard Time, > > ceridwennight at h... writes: > I was wondering why everyone, not just LV, thought the prophecy > child was a boy. Even Dumbledore thought so. > EC did some snipping... > Sherrie here: > BUT - that was in the part of the prophecy that Voldie never heard. > Either Snape didn't hear it (as we & Harry are told), or (as some > friends of mine & I have theorized) it was wiped from his memory. > Either way, as far as Voldie was concerned, there was no gender > specified in the prophecy. > > Elizabeth C here: > Well, the fact that Lord Thingy assumed the chosen one was a boy would > just support common enough belief at the time... that women would > not/could not be a serious/ legitimate threat. (snipped) Leah here: Is there any canon that says LV assumed a boy? Surely he would just work back from the two knowns in the prophecy fragment- that the Chosen One's parents must have thrice defied VM and that the Chosen One must have an end of July birthday. The two who met those criteria happened to be both boys. If Harry had been a Harriet she would still have ticked those particular boxes, and we would only have been able to judge whether LV had a sexist view of her as a lesser threat if he had then ignored the Potters and gone after Neville Leah From willsonkmom at msn.com Tue Jan 31 15:33:59 2006 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2006 15:33:59 -0000 Subject: Multiple Post: Back to Blacks and Re: special treatment of Malfoy In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147351 Potioncat: Looks like I shouldn't post when I'm sick. http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/147304 > Juli: Canon Please? where does it say that James overcame his feelings about Severus? AFAIK the only mention of a decrease in their animosity is in OoP, right after Harry goes into Snape's memory and talks to Remus and Sirius, they said that James grew up, he didn't go around cursing everyone, well except Snape, but Lily didn't know about this... They said that James and Severus always hated each other. Potioncat: you know, you're right! For some reason I've been thinking that James had cut back on cursing Snape as well, and that it was Snape who continued the fight. Looks like I gave James too much credit! http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/147308 > > Geoff: > How about: > > '"Fifty points from Gryffindor for lateness, I think," said > Snape. ""And, let me see, another twenty for your Muggle attire. you > know, I don't believe any house has ever been in negative figures > this early in the term - we haven't even started pudding. You might > have set a record, Potter" > (HBP "Snape Victorious" pp.153-54 UK edition) Potioncat: But...but... we were discussing Potions Class, not the Sorting Feast...and...and Harry does have a prior record of unorthodox arrivals! It isn't the same thing at all... OK, you got me. Actually this is a lovely piece of support! I wish I'd thought of it. From R.Vink2 at chello.nl Tue Jan 31 16:33:17 2006 From: R.Vink2 at chello.nl (Renee) Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2006 16:33:17 -0000 Subject: VA/H=Mx13+RP? Snape's Culpability? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147352 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Jen Reese" wrote: > > Carol: > > "And in the limited time available, he could not have come to his own > tentative understanding of what the partial Prophecy might mean, much > less anticipate how Voldemort would interpret it and choose to act on > it. Canon *does* support that interpretation--unless you choose to > believe that Dumbledore is wrong, in which case my arguments will > continue to fall on deaf ears." Jen R.: > > So far most people don't seem to believe Dumbledore said exactly what > he meant and meant what he said: Snape knew *a* child was involved > when he overheard the prophecy. Not Harry, *a* child. Why is it so > hard to take Dumbledore's words at face value here, so difficult to > believe Snape understood the part of the prophecy he overheard but > didn't know who it referred to? That his remorse came AFTER he learned > how Voldemort interpreted the prophecy to mean he would target the > Potters? Renee: I, for one, believe DD meant what he said to Harry, because I assume this is quite simply what Snape told DD: that he did realise it was about a child, but just didn't know which particular child it would be before Voldemort chose the son of James and Lily Potter. It's even possible that Snape added his own interpretation when he told Voldemort about the prophecy, and that Voldemort adopted it and never considered any other possibility. > I'm pretty much a DDM!Snape person (with some wavering) and believe > it's perfectly possible Snape understood *generally* the information > he was delivering to Voldemort because such a scenario could tell us > more about Snape's characterization and arc: At that time in his life > he may have put great value on the sort of thing Draco mentioned > valuing in HBP--glory, honor above other DE's, praise from Voldemort. > If so, then Voldemort's interpretation caused a monumental shift in > Snape. Before the revelation Snape was not concerned by who would be > affected even if it was a child, but after Voldemort's interpretation > he was MOVED to feel great remorse, a signal that whatever humanity he > may have submerged to serve Voldemort had opened up inside him again. > > I think that's a valid interpretation even if people don't agree with > it. Renee: So do I. But if we assume that Snape initially wasn't concerned about the possible fate of a baby, we get a glimpse of the "deeply horrible" person from one of JKR's interviews. That's why I tend towards a Snape who is DDM, because he's LID. Not in the sense that his debt towards James is binding and leaves him no choice but to protect Harry - this would go against the idea of free choice that is so important in the Potterverse; also, Wormtail would have been compelled to protect Harry at the end of GoF, which he obviously wasn't. IMO, Snape believes in the hold that such wizarding debts have on the indebted. It's a matter of honour to him. He is horrified that his attempts to absolve the debt - turning to Dumbledore, trying to warn James - have gone awry, and that instead of saving James, he has indirectly caused his death and that of his wife. Hence the remorse. I'm not entirely sure, though, that this is a sign of (re)emerged humanity and redemption. I have to say that I don't get the impression his remorse has turned him into a better man. He hasn't let go of his hatred of James and even directs it towards James's son, who has never done him any harm (except perhaps to his ego, by surviving without Snape's help - more than once). He still hasn't absolved his debt, though, and that is what binds him to DD's side, and thereby that of Harry. I'm not a native speaker, but does feeling remorse also imply being contrite? Is it merely by accident that JKR used the former and not the latter? Renee From foxmoth at qnet.com Tue Jan 31 16:38:21 2006 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2006 16:38:21 -0000 Subject: VA/H=Mx13+RP? Snape's Culpability? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147353 Jen R: > So far most people don't seem to believe Dumbledore said exactly what > he meant and meant what he said: Snape knew *a* child was involved > when he overheard the prophecy. Not Harry, *a* child. Why is it so > hard to take Dumbledore's words at face value here, so difficult to > believe Snape understood the part of the prophecy he overheard but > didn't know who it referred to? That his remorse came AFTER he learned > how Voldemort interpreted the prophecy to mean he would target the > Potters? Pippin: Everyone in the WW is someone's child. That the One would be identified as such is not unusual in a world where everybody is classified by their ancestry, and even Gryffindors think it's more important than individual merit. When Nearly Headless Nick seeks to defend his courage he does not cite his own deeds but instead begins a spiel about "the noble blood that runs in my veins" --OOP ch 11. We should also consider that Snape's own habit is to slither out of action, according to Bella, and that Voldemort had been avoiding an attack on Dumbledore. Snape would not necessarily assume that, having identified the one who could vanquish him, Voldemort would immediately seek to destroy him. I agree that Snape only came to regret what he'd done when he realized that Voldemort was going after lives that mattered to him, but I don't think we can conclude that Snape was okay with deliberately killing infants until then. Pippin From mmmwintersteiger at yahoo.com Tue Jan 31 16:44:24 2006 From: mmmwintersteiger at yahoo.com (mmmwintersteiger) Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2006 16:44:24 -0000 Subject: lupin, werewolves & "wagga wagga" In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147356 PAR: > we have Lockhart "demonstrating" his dealing with the "wagga > wagga werewolf"...claims...use of "the immensely complex > Homophus Charm"(COS pg 162 scholastic edition) to turn a > werewolf back into a man. Very interesting question you brought up. I had forgotton about the werewolf "cure". I would be wary of anything Lockhart had claimed to have done though. He could have been embellishing his story for the books he wrote. The person whose memory he stole could have just been treating the werewolf symptoms with Wolfsbane Potion and Lockhart decided to make the "story" even better by having the werewolf completely cured by the Homophus Charm. For all we know no one has ever successfully performed the Charm. PAR: > If being a werewolf is a disease then some would want the cure. > Others, who have over the years become as sociopathic as Greyback > would reject both the potion and the charm. Any chance this issue > will come up in Book 7? I absolutely think this issue will be addressed in book 7. Especially since Bill was injured by Greyback. If Lupin is working up to performing the Homophus Charm this could be huge for book 7. Question: Can you perform the charm on yourself? If not Lupin would still not be cured of his "disease". What if most of the werewolves don't have a conscience anymore? What if taking Wolfsbane Potion is the only way to retain the human part of yourself and Lupin is a rarity among the werewolf packs? Maybe Lupin was sent by DD to treat the new werewolves with Wolfsbane in an attempt to retain thier humain qualities? In that case Lupin would be in even more danger than originally thought. Imagine the untreated, "human-less" werewolves finding out that Lupin was trying to treat the new recruits in order to help them retain their humanity. This werewolf issue is quite vexing, definitely not enough info given to clear things up in my mind. Of course I like it that way, causes one to have to think. michelle From dd_ur_great at yahoo.co.uk Tue Jan 31 13:06:25 2006 From: dd_ur_great at yahoo.co.uk (dd_ur_great) Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2006 13:06:25 -0000 Subject: Some Questions on Book 6 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147357 > ed9743621: > > 1. Dumbledore is really dead or would be returning back in > > the last Book (I hope so)? > > 2. Was the killing of Dumbledore by Snape a deliberate one > > or is just a front to continue his spying duty on Voldemort? > > Geoff: > Pick up from message 132907 and skip through the list from there > onwards. I think you'll find a fair bit to keep you occupied.... dd_ur_great: Hi Ed, I'm new like you to this group, and I have some pretty basic (compared to the other intellectuals on this site, haha!!) questions too... I think that there's no getting away from the fact that Snape did really perform AK on DD and so DD is really dead (yes, I do really HATE to even think about that!!). But in the wizarding world that doesn't mean he won't come back in some form to help Harry, I think he will, maybe through his portrait? But I think Snape may not be all bad, the murder of DD may be in fact masterminded by DD himself, there have been some interesting posts here including ideas even going as far as assisted suicide!! And yes, thanks a lot, Geoff, for that enlightening rejoinder!! From rkdas at charter.net Tue Jan 31 18:09:49 2006 From: rkdas at charter.net (susanbones2003) Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2006 18:09:49 -0000 Subject: The importance of death /Harry and Cedric In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147358 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "susanbones2003" wrote: > > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "susanbones2003" > wrote: > > > > Karen wrote: > > > > How many times have we seen a child wiping > > > > > their face on their sleeve at a hurt? It's outstanding and > if > > you > > > > don't > > > > > see Harry as deeply grieving then I think maybe you are > > missing > > > > these > > > > > small types of gestures in OoTP and in HBP. > > > > > > Geoff: > > > I also find this very moving being a male who grew up in > the "boys > > > don't cry" era. I can remember a little over twenty years ago > when > > my > > > mother died having to confide six months later in a close friend > > that > > > I was worried because I didn't feel that I had grieved for her. > > > > > > But the piece of writing which always gets to me on this issue > is: > > > > > > 'The thing against which he had been fighting on and off ever > > since > > > he had come out of the maze was threatening to overpower him. He > > > could feel a burning, prickling feeling in the inner corners of > > his > > > eyes. He blinked and stared up at the ceiling. > > > "It wasn't your fault, Harry," Mrs.Weasley whispered. > > > "I told him to take the Cup with me," said Harry. > > > Now the burning feeling was in his throat, too. He wished Ron > > would > > > look away. > snipped > > > > (GOF "The Parting of the Ways" pp.619-620 UK edition) > > > > > > That I know how true can be - fighting to avoid crying and > keeping a stiff upper lip. > > > Jen here: > > You know what I also find really cool in JKR's writing? That she's > > demonstrated Harry growing up but in such small ways that like our > > own children, we have hardly noticed. Remember at the end of SS/PS > > when DD explained Lil.y's sacrifice to Harry. And Harry's > reaction? Again she treats it in a sort of an offhand way. > > > > "Dumbledore now became very interested in a bird out on the > > windowsill, which gave Harry time to dry his eyes on the sheet." > > p.299 SS Scholastic Books ed. > > > > In this book, Harry is younger and tears aren't yet a shameful > thing > > but still JKR mentions reactions (as in wiping his face on his > sleeve > > in OOP) but not the actual tears. It's a kind and gracious way of > > letting a person have his moment without making it an end in > itself. > > That distance is there, that Karen spoke of, but still the > aloneness of Harry in these moments, it just heightens the desire to > make human contact. I think that's one way JKR has made Harry a very > irresistable hero. She never lets us get too close in a manipulative > way. Even Harry has a right to his own moments. > Jen D. > > > > > > From starjackson1 at yahoo.com Mon Jan 30 14:26:41 2006 From: starjackson1 at yahoo.com (starjackson1) Date: Mon, 30 Jan 2006 14:26:41 -0000 Subject: Harry Potter and the Half-Crazed Bureaucracy! Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147359 Here is an abstract from an interesting article published on the Social Science Research Network about Government in the Harry Potter universe: http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=830765 Author: Ben Barton *** Abstract: This Essay examines what the Harry Potter series (and particularly the most recent book, The Half-Blood Prince) tells us about government and bureaucracy. There are two short answers. The first is that Rowling presents a government (The Ministry of Magic) that is 100% bureaucracy. There is no discernable executive or legislative branch, and no elections. There is a modified judicial function, but it appears to be completely dominated by the bureaucracy, and certainly does not serve as an independent check on governmental excess. Second, government is controlled by and for the benefit of the self- interested bureaucrat. The most cold-blooded public choice theorist could not present a bleaker portrait of a government captured by special interests and motivated solely by a desire to increase bureaucratic power and influence. Consider this partial list of government activities: a) torturing children for lying; b) utilizing a prison designed and staffed specifically to suck all life and hope out of the inmates; c) placing citizens in that prison without a hearing; d) allows the death penalty without a trial; e) allowing the powerful, rich or famous to control policy and practice; f) selective prosecution (the powerful go unpunished and the unpopular face trumped-up charges); g) conducting criminal trials without independent defense counsel; h) using truth serum to force confessions; i) maintaining constant surveillance over all citizens; j) allowing no elections whatsoever and no democratic lawmaking process; k) controlling the press. This partial list of activities brings home just how bleak Rowling's portrait of government is. The critique is even more devastating because the governmental actors and actions in the book look and feel so authentic and familiar. Cornelius Fudge, the original Minister of Magic, perfectly fits our notion of a bumbling politician just trying to hang onto his job. Delores Umbridge is the classic small-minded bureaucrat who only cares about rules, discipline, and her own power. Rufus Scrimgeour is a George Bush- like war leader, inspiring confidence through his steely resolve. The Ministry itself is made up of various sub-ministries with goofy names (e.g., The Goblin Liaison Office or the Ludicrous Patents Office) enforcing silly sounding regulations (e.g., The Decree for the Treatment of Non-Wizard Part-Humans or The Decree for the Reasonable Restriction of Underage Sorcery). These descriptions of government jibe with our own sarcastic views of bureaucracy and bureaucrats: bureaucrats tend to be amusing characters that propagate and enforce laws of limited utility with unwieldy names. When you combine the light-hearted satire with the above list of government activities, however, Rowling's critique of government becomes substantially darker and more powerful. Furthermore, Rowling eliminates many of the progressive defenses of bureaucracy. The most obvious omission is the elimination of the democratic defense. The first line of attack against public choice theory is always that bureaucrats must answer to elected officials, who must in turn answer to the voters. Rowling eliminates this defense by presenting a wholly unelected government. A second line of defense is the public-minded bureaucrat. Some theorists argue that the public choice critique ignores what government officials are really like. They are not greedy, self- interested budget-maximizers. Instead, they are decent and publicly oriented. Rowling parries this defense by her presentation of successful bureaucrats (who clearly fit the public choice model) and unsuccessful bureaucrats. Harry's best friend's Dad, Arthur Weasley is a well-meaning government employee. He is described as stuck in a dead end job, in the least respected part of the government, in the worst office in the building. In Rowling's world governmental virtue is disrespected and punished. Lastly, Rowling even eliminates the free press as a check on government power. The wizarding newspaper, The Daily Prophet, is depicted as a puppet to the whims of Ministry of Magic. I end the piece with some speculation about how Rowling came to her bleak vision of government, and the greater societal effects it might have. Speculating about the effects of Rowling's portrait of government is obviously dangerous, but it seems likely that we will see a continuing uptick in distrust of government and libertarianism as the Harry Potter generation reaches adulthood. From celizwh at intergate.com Tue Jan 31 18:51:17 2006 From: celizwh at intergate.com (houyhnhnm102) Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2006 18:51:17 -0000 Subject: DD and Snape's Culpability In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147360 brady: > I also have a feeling that Snape knows the complete prophecy. He only > told LV what DD told him to tell. houyhnhnm: I have been coming around to this belief. I can't figure out any other explanation for the fact that Trelawney knew Snape was present. He must have still been present when she came out of her trance, therefore he must have heard the entire prophecy. (or course that also means DD wasn't telling Harry the truth in the broom shed--either that or Snape really was the spider on his hat) From tropicwhale at yahoo.com Tue Jan 31 18:56:08 2006 From: tropicwhale at yahoo.com (Kristin Hessenauer) Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2006 10:56:08 -0800 (PST) Subject: Regulus Black / Significance of DD & Sirius having In-Reply-To: <1138698747.855.60631.m19@yahoogroups.com> Message-ID: <20060131185608.69284.qmail@web33206.mail.mud.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 147361 Alla: > So, if not to show Aberforth and Regulus as complete opposites of > Albus and Sirius (imagine that this is the case), what do you > think is the plot significance of them being in the picture at all? > > I mean, Regulus sure seems to get a nice, if secondary storyline, > but in terms of him being Sirius' brother and Aberforth being Albus' > brother, I just don't see how important that could be, when book 7 > has so much to deal with. > > I guess I can sort of see them offering help to Harry in his quest, > sort of substituting for Sirius and Albus, but would not that be > easier and less convoluted not to kill off Albus and Sirius in the > first place? ~~ tropicwhale: Personally I think she had to kill off both Sirius and Albus, after all they were father figures for Harry, and he did lean on them for support. Killing them off forces him to stand on his own. However, anyone think that Regulus was a spy like Snape? Or something of that nature? If you go with the whole RAB and horcrux in Grimmuald would it not prove that not everyone was as they seemed. Regulus wasn't Dark and thus neither are certain other characters are as weak or superficial as Rowling first made them out to be, such as Percy or even Wormtail (not to mention Snape or Draco). That has been a constant twist in the books, Quirrell had Voldie on the back of his head, Lupin (seemingly normal) was a werewolf, Sirius was innocent, Scabbers was Wormtail and thus a traitor. Rowling uses this constantly why would she turn it again and have someone weak be strong? As to Aberforth, if he is the bartender at the Hogshead, remember the Hogshead is an unsavory place, lots of people like Mudungus go there so it is a Mecca of criminals. Also anyone think about what exactly Aberforth was doing illegally with a goat?? Anyone? I often wonder about that. From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Tue Jan 31 19:51:36 2006 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2006 19:51:36 -0000 Subject: Regulus Black / Significance of DD & Sirius having In-Reply-To: <20060131185608.69284.qmail@web33206.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147362 > Alla: > > > So, if not to show Aberworth and Regulus as complete opposites of > > Albus and Sirius (imagine that this is the case), what do you > > think is the plot significance of them being in the picture at all? Exodusts: > I think the main reason they were killed off is to serve the drama, > see HBP Ch 30: Alla: Yes, I understand why JKR killed Albus and Sirius off - Hero journey and all that :-). Am not particularly impressed with that particular decision, but do think that she handled the storyline well. I am also hoping that the reason why Sirius had to go will be interesting and important and MORE than just because Harry has to "stand alone at the end" ( paraphrase). Since JKR promised that there is more, I will keep hoping. :) But this was not my main point of wonderings in my initial post. I am specifically curious about whether there would be any plot significant reasons that the two adults characters whom Harry felt the closest too and now dead BOTH have brothers. I am doubting that if Regulus and Aberworth are both alive, they will have page time to get as close to Harry as Albus and Sirius were, although on the other hand JKR dealt with Albus and Sirius getting closer to Harry also pretty fast in book page time. I understand the potential Significance of Regulus storyline, what I AM trying to figure out if there is any significance to Regulus storyline because he is Sirius brother and to Aberworth storyline BECAUSE he is Albus brother( and if my assumption that he is alive is correct) There is also that small matter that this is Harry's story and so their storylines could be only support based, IMO. But then in this context, I do wonder if Aberworth and Regulus are supposed to give Harry adult support, why Albus and Sirius were killed. I mean they were killed to CUT OFF Harry's adult support, right? That is why I am not sure if Regulus and Aberworh would be given that much support to Harry. Am I making any sense? Exodusts: > Regarding Regulus Black, I think one reason JKR put him into the > story is as yet another clue-hinted plot-twist. He was clearly > foreshadowed in OotP as Sirius-doppelganger Stubby Boardman Alla: I do hope you are right. As I said, I suspect that Regulus is alive, but I am not sure of course. I would love for that to be true. Kristen: > If you go with the whole RAB and horcrux in Grimmuald would it not > prove that not everyone was as they seemed. Regulus wasn't Dark and > thus neither are certain other characters are as weak or superficial > as Rowling first made them out to be, such as Percy or even Wormtail > (not to mention Snape or Draco). Alla: Could you expand on that, please? I am not sure I understand. We already know who Regulus was and who he became, no? I mean, we know that he was DE, wanted to get out because he did not have a stomach for killing, then we learned that he managed to defy Voldemort with horcrux ( if you agree that RAB is Regulus, not everybody does, but to me it is crystal clear, personally). Are you saying that we are due for another reversal with Regulus and we will find out that he is evil after all? If this is your argument and I am asking you if it is, because I am not sure, then I don't think I can agree. I don't think that Regulus will be not as he seems right now, not anymore. To me Regulus is an example of the character that worked hard for redemption and achieved it even if he paid with his life for it Kristen: > As to Aberforth, if he is the bartender at the Hogshead, remember > the Hogshead is an unsavory place, lots of people like Mudungus go > there so it is a Mecca of criminals. Also anyone think about what > exactly Aberforth was doing illegally with a goat?? Anyone? I often > wonder about that. > Alla: Right, I can imagine all sorts of possibilities with Aberworth storyline, but what is his role as brother of great Albus Dumbledore? That is what bugs me at the moment. :-) JMO, Alla From mmmwintersteiger at yahoo.com Tue Jan 31 19:59:16 2006 From: mmmwintersteiger at yahoo.com (mmmwintersteiger) Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2006 19:59:16 -0000 Subject: Will there be an ESE!character in Book 7? In-Reply-To: <43DEEB7E.50804@sprynet.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147363 >Bart: >...Make Neville think that he is going to get revenge > on Voldemort, while corrupting him one step at a time...What have >the good guys done for him? His parents are insane shells, and his > grandmother is a domineering bitch. Even so, I don't think Neville is as gullible as he appears. There would have to be a lot of charming invovled if someone were to trick Neville into thinking he was doing good not evil. He is a devoted friend to Harry but he also makes a stand when it is *right vs. wrong*, remember when he tried to stop Ron, Hermione and Harry and they cursed him? I think his domineering grandmother causes him great stress which makes him seem as though he is not as a profficient a wizard as he truely is. I think we will see Neville as an even greater hero in book 7 then he was in OOtP. His parents are very well cared for at St. Mungo's-I mean really, what can the good guys do for them now? Keeping them comfortable and safe is really all that can be done. michelle- has secret crush on Neville :) From manawydan at ntlworld.com Tue Jan 31 20:10:54 2006 From: manawydan at ntlworld.com (manawydan) Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2006 20:10:54 -0000 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Harry Potter and the Half-Crazed Bureaucracy! References: Message-ID: <007601c626a2$725ea300$c9340152@f3b7j4> No: HPFGUIDX 147364 ----- Original Message ----- From: "starjackson1" Subject: [HPforGrownups] Harry Potter and the Half-Crazed Bureaucracy! > Here is an abstract from an interesting article published on the > Social Science Research Network about Government in the Harry Potter > universe: > This Essay examines what the Harry Potter series (and particularly > the most recent book, The Half-Blood Prince) tells us about > government and bureaucracy. There are two short answers. The first > is that Rowling presents a government (The Ministry of Magic) that > is 100% bureaucracy. There is no discernable executive or > legislative branch, and no elections. There is a modified judicial > function, but it appears to be completely dominated by the > bureaucracy, and certainly does not serve as an independent check on > governmental excess. There _may_ be an executive branch, but it's not been relevant to canon so it's only hinted at, and that is the Wizarding Congress - there are several references to historical ones having taken place. JKR seems to recognise (as the author of the paper doesn't) that in a society where government is by bureaucracy, then the overarching bodies that stand outside it (such as the Congress and the Wizenagemot) would be collective. The principle of collective government also appears to predate the formation of the MoM in 1693 - before then there was the Council. > Second, government is controlled by and for the benefit of the self- > interested bureaucrat. The most cold-blooded public choice theorist > could not present a bleaker portrait of a government captured by > special interests and motivated solely by a desire to increase > bureaucratic power and influence. Consider this partial list of Though I'd wonder more deeply about the kind of mindset in the WW that would regard those abuses as being acceptable as the price of keeping safe from Muggles. Secrecy is clearly so deeply ingrained that it's quite acceptable for the bureaucracy to have the power to make all sorts of petty and burdensome decisions (as well as behaving self interestedly and partially). > Furthermore, Rowling eliminates many of the progressive defenses of > bureaucracy. The most obvious omission is the elimination of the > democratic defense. The first line of attack against public choice > theory is always that bureaucrats must answer to elected officials, > who must in turn answer to the voters. Rowling eliminates this > defense by presenting a wholly unelected government. Do the inhabitants of the WW have any conception of democracy as we understand it, though. Because we have been brought up with it (and learned in school history classes about the struggle for democracy and the franchise), we regard it as natural. I don't see any sign of that in the books. The transition seems to have been from oligarchy to bureaucracy, rather than from absolutism to democracy as it was in our world. I do sometimes have the wry thought of someone from our world trying to explain something like English constitutional monarchy, the partition of Ireland, or the result of the 2000 US presidential election to someone from the WW! > A second line of defense is the public-minded bureaucrat. Some > theorists argue that the public choice critique ignores what > government officials are really like. They are not greedy, self- > interested budget-maximizers. Instead, they are decent and publicly > oriented. Rowling parries this defense by her presentation of > successful bureaucrats (who clearly fit the public choice model) and > unsuccessful bureaucrats. Harry's best friend's Dad, Arthur Weasley > is a well-meaning government employee. He is described as stuck in a > dead end job, in the least respected part of the government, in the > worst office in the building. In Rowling's world governmental virtue > is disrespected and punished. Though by HBP, Arthur has been promoted and has come into a far more influential position. But, once again, there doesn't seem to be any conception that the inhabitants of the WW actually _expect_ virtue from the MoM, they expect it to keep them safe, in the normal run of life from the Muggles, and in times of emergency (as now) to keep them safe from terrorists of the Voldemort sort. > have. Speculating about the effects of Rowling's portrait of > government is obviously dangerous, but it seems likely that we will > see a continuing uptick in distrust of government and libertarianism > as the Harry Potter generation reaches adulthood. Can't see it myself. Because there's no independent political activity outside the bureaucracy, there doesn't appear to be any clear path for change. If you're going into politics, there's either the Percy route - you enter the bureaucracy and make your way up the greasy pole, or there's the Riddle route, you engage in conspiracy with a circle of conspirators with a view to overthrowing the system in your own advantage. And the risk of instability is always that the WW's cover would be blown and the Muggles would find out. Perhaps we'll see the Ministry getting a severe shock in the final volume, but no revolutions. There's a very interesting discussion of politics in the WW here http://community.livejournal.com/hp_essays/7250.html - written before HBP and not, I think, updated, but well worth a read even so. The author sees patronage as the main vehicle for politics and while I wouldn't totally agree with him, I would agree with a lot of it. hwyl Ffred O Benryn wleth hyd Luch Reon Cymru yn unfryd gerhyd Wrion Gwret dy Cymry yghymeiri From willsonkmom at msn.com Tue Jan 31 20:13:32 2006 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2006 20:13:32 -0000 Subject: Regulus Black / Significance of DD & Sirius having In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147365 > Alla: > > Right, I can imagine all sorts of possibilities with Aberworth > storyline, but what is his role as brother of great Albus Dumbledore? > That is what bugs me at the moment. :-) > Potioncat: Another thought about the significance of the brothers. There is a huge section of HP fans who have no idea that the barman is Aberforth Dumbledore. Harry doesn't know. I don't think anything in canon tells us this. I'm sure there's a smaller, but still significant number of fans who don't particularly remember that Sirius's brother was named Regulus. The impact of Regulus's role and Aberforth's role will be more intense for those fans who are expecting nothing than it will be for us. It would be easier for us to say, "Is that it?" Potioncat, still dosed up on cold medicine, and hoping this post isn't too foggy. From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Tue Jan 31 20:26:38 2006 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2006 20:26:38 -0000 Subject: lupin, werewolves & "wagga wagga" In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147366 Michelle wrote: > Very interesting question you brought up. I had forgotton about the werewolf "cure". I would be wary of anything Lockhart had claimed to have done though. The person whose memory he stole could have just been treating the werewolf symptoms with Wolfsbane Potion and Lockhart decided to make the "story" even better by having the werewolf completely cured by the Homophus Charm. For all we know no one has ever successfully performed the Charm. If Lupin is working up to performing the Homophus Charm this could be huge for book 7. Question: Can you perform the charm on yourself? If not Lupin would still not be cured of his "disease". > > What if most of the werewolves don't have a conscience anymore? What if taking Wolfsbane Potion is the only way to retain the human part of yourself and Lupin is a rarity among the werewolf packs? Maybe Lupin was sent by DD to treat the new werewolves with Wolfsbane in an attempt to retain thier humain qualities? In that case Lupin would be in even more danger than originally thought. Imagine the untreated, "human-less" werewolves finding out that Lupin was trying to treat the new recruits in order to help them retain their humanity. Carol responds: First, it's "homorphus" with an "r" (ho[mo], man or human, plus "morph," change, plus "-us," masculine suffix). (Geoff, please correct me if I'm wrong.) I have a feeling that this spell is the same one that Lupin and Black used in PoA to change Pettigrew back into his human form--not permanent or binding, just a way of revealing his human identity. (I could be wrong, of course, as the spell they use is not named.) But it would be rather difficult for Lupin in werewolf form to use it on himself as he can neither speak nor hold a wand. The scene in OoP where Lupin is talking to Mr. Weasley's werewolf roommate in St. Mungo's (in a conversation we don't overhear) implies strongly that there is no cure for werewolves, neither a spell nor a potion. Nor does Wolfsbane Potion "treat the symptoms." All it does is calm the rage of the werewolf and allow him to keep his mind when he transforms. It does not prevent the transformation itself. A werewolf who took it would still be revealed as a werewolf if he allowed himself to be seen by others on a full-moon night. Nor can Lupin concoct Wolfsbane Potion for himself. He is dependent on Professor Snape, a potions expert, to make it in PoA. Since then, Lupin has had to do without it, which (IMO) explains why he is more ragged, more lined, more grey-haired each time Harry sees him after PoA. Unemployment alone would not do that (he isn't starving), nor would grief for Sirius Black, who has not yet died when we see Lupin early in OoP as one of the advance guard, greyer and with more lines "in his young face" than Harry remembers from the previous year. (Interesting that Lupin alone of the surviving Marauders and Snape, who is the same age, is twice referred to as young.) Yet Lupin has been able to retain the human part of himself without Wolfsbane Potion for most of his life. First and probably most important, Dumbledore allowed him to attend Hogwarts (and arranged for him to transform in the Shrieking Shack with Madam Pomfrey's help). Second, in about his fifth year, his friends were able to join him on full-moon nights in Animagus form (not that I think their adventures were exactly sensible or risk-free, but apparently they made the transformations more bearable for Remus). Third, after Hogwarts, he was able to join the Order and presumably contribute to it, even though he no longer had the Shrieking Shack to hide in and most likely no longer had the company of his friends on full-moon nights, especially after James Potter married and fathered a child. We don't know what happened during the time when Sirius Black (at least) started suspecting Lupin of being the traitor, or where he was during the twelve years between Godric's Hollow and his hiring as DADA professor in Harry's third year, but the battered suitcase with its peeling letters seems to indicate that he was some sort of itinerant teacher or tutor. (Maybe, like Quirrell, he had one other earlier year as DADA professor at Hogwarts but lost his job through the DADA curse before being permanently banned from that position?) At any rate, he had neither the company of his friends (one was dead, one was hiding in rat form, and one was in Azkaban) nor access to Wolfsbane Potion during those twelve years. It's only during his ten months at Hogwarts that he's able to transform in peace because Snape "made the potion, and made it perfectly." And yet Lupin (whatever his failings and weaknesses) apparently maintains his humanity throughout those years or he could not have returned to Hogwarts to teach DADA (and established such a rapport with Harry). Weak and prone to secrecy he may be, but he is also (with the notable exception of running out to the Shrieking Shack without taking his potion on a full-moon night, with lamentable consequences) calm and rational and compassionate. So whatever he's doing with the werewolves in OoP and HBP, it's not offering them Wolfsbane Potion (or "curing" them with the Homorphus Charm). He *may* be setting an example of civilized behavior, but as the other werewolves are uneducated and would resent his ability to use a wand legally if they know about it, I can't see him making much of an impression. What I don't understand is how parents whose children were bitten during Dumbledore's tenure as headmaster could allow the children to be uneducated, simply discarding them and letting them fend for themselves eating scraps from rubbish bins and endangering others by transforming once a month. What parent, short of the fortunately childless Bellatrix Lestrange, would do that? Maybe the parents didn't know that Dumbledore would tolerate and protect the werewolf children if the parents asked his help, but surely they would educate them at home and provide a safe place for them to transform even if they didn't send them to school? And wouldn't the children get Hogwarts letters like all other magical children in Britain, as Remus obviously did? Why would DD go to the trouble of helping one child, even planting the Whomping Willow so he could hide in the Shrieking Shack each month and not help other children in the same position? It seems like a giant plot hole or plot flaw to me. Carol, wondering if Lupin spent those twelve lost years tutoring werewolf children From R.Vink2 at chello.nl Tue Jan 31 20:51:49 2006 From: R.Vink2 at chello.nl (Renee) Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2006 20:51:49 -0000 Subject: Q In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147367 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "dumbledore11214" wrote: Alla: > I understand the potential Significance of Regulus storyline, what I > AM trying to figure out if there is any significance to Regulus > storyline because he is Sirius brother and to Aberworth storyline > BECAUSE he is Albus brother( and if my assumption that he is alive > is correct) Renee: As far as I remember, JKR confirmed that Aberforth was the barman at the Hogshead, so yes, I think he's alive. His significance? Maybe he's been his brother's confidante all the time, and as such the only one who knows exactly why Albus trusted Snape. As for Regulus, I lean towards the Regulus = Stubby Boardman (or Regulus has been posing as Stubby Boardman) theory, in which case we've had a hint concerning him as early as PoA. This only works if Regulus and Sirius look sufficiently alike for Doris Purkiss, source of the Quibbler article, to confuse them twelve years after her rendez-vous with "Stubby". Making them brothers would explain the likeness. It would also give JKR an opportunity to bring Regulus up in a natural way - Harry seeing Regulus on the tapestry, Slughorn talking about the Black brothers, etc. So the explanation is different in either case. I don't think there's a special significance to the fact that two dead father figures both turn out to have a brother. That is, I can't think of one. Alla: > > There is also that small matter that this is Harry's story and so > their storylines could be only support based, IMO. But then in this > context, I do wonder if Aberworth and Regulus are supposed to give > Harry adult support, why Albus and Sirius were killed. I mean they > were killed to CUT OFF Harry's adult support, right? > > That is why I am not sure if Regulus and Aberworh would be given that > much support to Harry. Am I making any sense? Renee: Yes - at least, I believe I get your meaning. But Albus and Sirius were more than just adult support: they were beloved father figures, guides and protectors. They had to go because Harry, soon an adult himself according to wizarding law, has to follow his own course in the last book, not because he can't have any adult support at all. Aberforth and Regulus (if the latter is, indeed, alive) won't be in Book 7 to take the place of their brothers. If they're going to be of use, it will probably be because they have important information. Renee From kchuplis at alltel.net Tue Jan 31 21:11:46 2006 From: kchuplis at alltel.net (Karen) Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2006 15:11:46 -0600 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Regulus Black / Significance of DD & Sirius having References: Message-ID: <002e01c626aa$f19c5c90$b301010a@ConsolidatedTelephone.local> No: HPFGUIDX 147368 Potioncat: Another thought about the significance of the brothers. There is a huge section of HP fans who have no idea that the barman is Aberforth Dumbledore. Harry doesn't know. I don't think anything in canon tells us this. I'm sure there's a smaller, but still significant number of fans who don't particularly remember that Sirius's brother was named Regulus. kchuplis: You know *I* kept wondering why everyone kept referring to the barman as Aberforth and I read the book at least a couple of times. I'm on it again and the other night read the meeting section and saw the one little blurb where Harry thinks he looks vaguely familiar. I guess put that together with the fact we know Albus goes there for mead off and on and that is the "cannon" that the barman is Aberforth. Not real convincing but I can see why people think that now. From foxmoth at qnet.com Tue Jan 31 21:05:47 2006 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2006 21:05:47 -0000 Subject: Harry Potter and the Half-Crazed Bureaucracy! In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147369 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "starjackson1" wrote: > > Here is an abstract from an interesting article published on the > Social Science Research Network about Government in the Harry Potter > universe: > > http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=830765 > > Author: Ben Barton Speculating about the effects of Rowling's portrait of > government is obviously dangerous, but it seems likely that we will > see a continuing uptick in distrust of government and libertarianism > as the Harry Potter generation reaches adulthood. > Libertarian? I don't think so. The non-publishing related links on JKR's website are all to advocacy organizations: Amnesty International, the MS Society and One Parent Families, which exist in large part to put pressure on government bureaucracies to establish programs and/or regulations which respond to their concerns. Laudable work, but hardly libertarian. In the paper itself, which you can download from the link above, the author's effort to show that most of Rowling's bureaucrats are ineffective or evil led him to ignore the possibility of spy!Percy, for which I can't blame him, but also the existence of Amelia Bones, Kingsley Shacklebolt and Tonks. Pippin From katmac at katmac.cncdsl.com Tue Jan 31 21:13:55 2006 From: katmac at katmac.cncdsl.com (lagattalucianese) Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2006 21:13:55 -0000 Subject: JKR's secrets about Snape and Hagrid (was:.../Snape's secret/etc...) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147370 > > I do think whatever JKR revealed must have had a bit of bang, enough > so it would affect both Rickman's and Coltrane's portrayals of their > characters even in the early films. I also suspect that the two > secrets are related, i.e., that Snape and Hagrid both know something > or have some sort of connection that we haven't yet learned, which > almost certainly pertains to Harry. And which will also explain their > mutual tolerance and acceptance (even support, in Hagrid's case) of > each other, when they couldn't be two more different people. > > Julie > La Gatta Lucianese, who is high on cold tablets: if (REALITY) { STOP; } else { Hagrid = Lily + polyjuice; Snape = James + polyjuice; Harry = Hagrid * Snape; } (Which just goes to show that too much polyjuice can make you Moody....) From rdoliver30 at yahoo.com Tue Jan 31 19:20:56 2006 From: rdoliver30 at yahoo.com (lupinlore) Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2006 19:20:56 -0000 Subject: JKR's dealing with emotions (was Re: The importance of death /Harry and Cedric) In-Reply-To: <00a401c62674$277a5bf0$b301010a@ConsolidatedTelephone.local> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147371 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Karen" wrote: > In fact, I'm really becoming more and more > amazed at how well she has written about grief without any overtness. > Chuckle. It truly is amazing how people read totally different books, isn't it? I find her dealing with Harry's grief (or amazing lack thereof) to be incredibly poor writing and completely unbelievable, especially after that blow up over Cedric. It would have to be a LOT more overt than that to be believable. When Harry came up with that quote about being strong because Sirius wouldn't want him to grieve overtly I actually laughed out loud in derision. Talk about sweeping something under the rug for no other reason than to get on with the plot! But that just brings up a question of JKR's handling of strong emotion in general. What does she do well, and what does she do poorly? CAPSLOCK Harry was over the top in the view of many readers, many others don't find her handling of his grief (or lack thereof) over Sirius to be believable (especially given CAPSLOCK Harry in OOTP), and her handling of romance brought a chorus of rasberries. Perhaps it does have to do with emotional styles. I really don't know. But it certainly is true that, surveying a number of different boards and forums (particularly HPfGU, Sugarquill, and Fictionalley, along with numerous fanfic chat sites), those three instances in particular bring a storm of dissent and objection. What do other people think is the source of this? Lupinlore From lucianam73 at yahoo.com.br Tue Jan 31 21:30:35 2006 From: lucianam73 at yahoo.com.br (lucianam73) Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2006 21:30:35 -0000 Subject: Q/Regulus Black / Significance of DD & Sirius having a brother In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147372 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Renee" wrote: > > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "dumbledore11214" > wrote: > > Alla: > > I understand the potential Significance of Regulus storyline, what I > > AM trying to figure out if there is any significance to Regulus > > storyline because he is Sirius brother and to Aberworth storyline > > BECAUSE he is Albus brother( and if my assumption that he is alive > > is correct) > > Renee: > > As far as I remember, JKR confirmed that Aberforth was the barman at > the Hogshead, so yes, I think he's alive. His significance? Maybe he's > been his brother's confidante all the time, and as such the only one > who knows exactly why Albus trusted Snape. > > As for Regulus, I lean towards the Regulus = Stubby Boardman (or > Regulus has been posing as Stubby Boardman) theory, in which case > we've had a hint concerning him as early as PoA. This only works if > Regulus and Sirius look sufficiently alike for Doris Purkiss, source > of the Quibbler article, to confuse them twelve years after her > rendez-vous with "Stubby". Making them brothers would explain the > likeness. It would also give JKR an opportunity to bring Regulus up in > a natural way - Harry seeing Regulus on the tapestry, Slughorn talking > about the Black brothers, etc. > > So the explanation is different in either case. I don't think there's > a special significance to the fact that two dead father figures both > turn out to have a brother. That is, I can't think of one. > Alla: > > (much snipped) But then in this > > context, I do wonder if Aberworth and Regulus are supposed to give > > Harry adult support, why Albus and Sirius were killed. I mean they > > were killed to CUT OFF Harry's adult support, right? > > > > That is why I am not sure if Regulus and Aberworh would be given that > > much support to Harry. Am I making any sense? > > Renee: > (also snipped) > Aberforth and Regulus (if the latter is, indeed, alive) won't be in > Book 7 to take the place of their brothers. If they're going to be of > use, it will probably be because they have important information. > lucianam: Agreed, I also think Aberforth and Regulus will have only instrumental roles is Book 7, I don't see Harry bonding with them. Specially because Aberforth seems to be very elusive, and Regulus is, well, dead. But the repetition of the 'unknown brother' theme is indeed suspicious. Why did JKR choose to pull two brothers out of the shadows at once (at once = I mean in the same book)? I wonder if both will have the same role in the story structure, that is, will both be sources of trustworthy information and/or tools for Harry? Does anybody remember something JKR said in her interview to Mugglenet/Leaky, she said it would be profitable to speculate about Dumbledore's family. She could be talking about Aberforth. From kchuplis at alltel.net Tue Jan 31 21:41:52 2006 From: kchuplis at alltel.net (Karen) Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2006 15:41:52 -0600 Subject: [HPforGrownups] JKR's dealing with emotions (was Re: The importance of death /Harry and Cedric) References: Message-ID: <000501c626af$263a3900$b301010a@ConsolidatedTelephone.local> No: HPFGUIDX 147373 Lupinlore: Perhaps it does have to do with emotional styles. I really don't know. But it certainly is true that, surveying a number of different boards and forums (particularly HPfGU, Sugarquill, and Fictionalley, along with numerous fanfic chat sites), those three instances in particular bring a storm of dissent and objection. What do other people think is the source of this? kchuplis: I suppose it is because of the life experience people bring to the books with them. Everyone handles things differently and therefore sees this as "real" or "unreal". I have, I think, demostrated how it is real at least in relation to my experience, and to some others on the discussion of grief. I still believe it's perfectly portrayed and if you are reading it closely you see plenty of grief for Sirius. I mean, it goes on for the rest of the book in OoTP and half of HBP. I guess I'm not sure what peope expect. Should he be breaking into tears in classes or something? Honestly, the bigger the grief the more one shuts down (at least in many people's experience). I still don't quite understand why Harry would be raging all over because of grief for Sirius. I still see capslock!Harry as dealing with way more than Cedric's death but rather the reality of terror in his life and too little information, his age and resentment that he has been handling major confrontations with LV since his first year and now torture and murder in a major way and still is kept in the dark and told he is "too young" over and over as though he doesn't "get" that this is dangerous. Good heavens, if anyone gets the seriousness of the situation, I think it is Harry. Heck, even without teenage hormones that would p*** me off. If anything Sirius' death settles him down because he #1 gets more info from DD finally and #2 comes back to the reality that no one is "safe" so you just handle things as they come. From katmac at katmac.cncdsl.com Tue Jan 31 21:47:17 2006 From: katmac at katmac.cncdsl.com (lagattalucianese) Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2006 21:47:17 -0000 Subject: VA/H=Mx13+RP? Snape's Culpability? In-Reply-To: <008b01c625e6$d10af5a0$14b2a8c0@rechnerchen> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147374 > > Miles: > This child was not born then. So nobody could know that there are *only* two > possibilities. You judge the situation by information that neither Snape, > Voldemort nor anyone had or could have, unless they would know the number of > children born in the future. > IIRC, the *most* Snape could have overheard is as follows: "The one with the power to vanquish the Dark Lord approaches...born to those who have thrice defied him, born as the seventh month dies..." This tells us maybe three things: 1. There is or will be somebody out there with the power to vanquish the Dark Lord. (Which Dark Lord is not specified, nor in what respect he is Dark.) 2. Said somebody was, is being, or will be born to some people who have thrice defied either the Dark Lord or the said somebody. (Don't you just love the precision of English pronouns?) 3. The said somebody was, is being, or will be born somewhere along toward the end of July, assuming the prophecy refers to the Gregorian Calendar and not, e.g., the lunar calendar. I can see Snape picking himself up at the foot of the stairs, scratching his head, and thinking, "Well, *that* was certainly helpful... Maybe I'd better pass it along to the boss, just in case he knows something I don't, but personally, I think the old girl's been smoking Floo Powder." From horridporrid03 at yahoo.com Tue Jan 31 21:59:34 2006 From: horridporrid03 at yahoo.com (horridporrid03) Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2006 21:59:34 -0000 Subject: Will there be an ESE!character in Book 7? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147375 > >>Vicki Merriman: > > I think Dudley is right up there for the role of betrayer, but > even more so, I think Ron is, somewhat inadvertently but > still. . . the old slippery slope. Ron is his best friend, but he > constantly resents the extra attention harry gets. And Dudley is > a no brainer. He'd cough up harry for a box of candy, and never > realize he was also coughing up his family snd himself at the same > time. Betsy Hp: Dudley? I can't see it. For one, it wouldn't be much of a betrayal. Harry would not be surprised that Dudley didn't have his back. For another, I don't know that it's even possible for Dudley to lead Voldemort or a random Death Eater to Harry. I don't think the protection at the Dursleys depends on who is or is not invited in. It's not like with vampires. Harry is protected as long as Petunia gives him space in her home. Dudley can't affect that for all the candy in the world. Ron would surprise me as well. His jealousy jag has been and gone. I think Ron is well over any resentment he may have felt. We saw him work through it in GoF, and I for one haven't seen any signs of it returning. Plus, I think Ron has seen how much Harry's role of "Chosen One" has affected him. Sure, Harry gets praise every now and again, but he also gets evil Dark Lords tripping through his mind, massive headaches, mocking press, and everyone he loves put at risk. Meanwhile, Ron's able to be a quidditch hero, do his best eel impersonation with a girl or two, and he's prefect. I'm really not sure what Voldemort could offer Ron at this point. Of the trio I think Hermione is the most likely to put Harry at risk. And that through thinking she knows more than she does, or taking on a enemy she's not really prepared for, rather than out and out betrayal. (And I'm not predicting anything of the sort will happen.) The only peer betrayal that I've seen any sort of foreshadowing for myself is the twins. *Possibly* Seamus, though I think that's another boat that's sailed. The Creevey brothers have been awfully silent of late, but that probably means they're off the hook for role of betrayer. (Not for cannon fodder though, bless them.) No one else really comes to mind. But I do expect at least one betrayal. It wouldn't be a Harry Potter book without one. Betsy Hp From kchuplis at alltel.net Tue Jan 31 22:09:03 2006 From: kchuplis at alltel.net (Karen) Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2006 16:09:03 -0600 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Will there be an ESE!character in Book 7? References: Message-ID: <000e01c626b2$f20c14b0$b301010a@ConsolidatedTelephone.local> No: HPFGUIDX 147376 You know... I was thinking...what about Moody? I mean, THAT would be a double whammy. Impersonated by a Bad Guy, so obviously now the "good" Moody is there. The real Moody is actually much more surly and paranoid than the Fake!Moody portrayed and I don't get great feelings from him towards Harry (the picture scene was pretty tactless in my mind and don't forget "we all know there's something funny about that Potter kid" in St. Mungo's). And who would be expecting a double flip like that? Fake!Moody->Real!Moody->ESE!Moody. Just a thought. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From quick_silver71 at yahoo.ca Tue Jan 31 22:14:22 2006 From: quick_silver71 at yahoo.ca (quick_silver71) Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2006 22:14:22 -0000 Subject: Will there be an ESE!character in Book 7? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147378 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "horridporrid03" wrote: > The only peer betrayal that I've seen any sort of foreshadowing for > myself is the twins. *Possibly* Seamus, though I think that's > another boat that's sailed. The Creevey brothers have been awfully > silent of late, but that probably means they're off the hook for > role of betrayer. (Not for cannon fodder though, bless them.) No > one else really comes to mind. > > But I do expect at least one betrayal. It wouldn't be a Harry > Potter book without one. > > Betsy Hp > I thought though that HBP was really like "the first part of a two part book" or something like that. Wouldn't that make Snape the "betrayal" that everyone is looking for? Personally I'd put the Twins in company with Snape, Hermione, Sirius, and maybe Lupin as characters who are "good" but whose mistakes and personalities often help the "Dark" side or trip up the "good" guys. Quick_Silver From Lynx412 at AOL.com Tue Jan 31 22:26:39 2006 From: Lynx412 at AOL.com (Lynx412 at AOL.com) Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2006 17:26:39 EST Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Regulus Black / Significance of DD & Sirius having Message-ID: <244.61d4e2f.31113e1f@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 147379 In a message dated 1/31/2006 4:13:00 PM Eastern Standard Time, kchuplis at alltel.net writes: > kchuplis: > > You know *I* kept wondering why everyone kept referring to the barman as > Aberforth and I read the book at least a couple of times. I'm on it again > and the other night read the meeting section and saw the one little blurb > where Harry thinks he looks vaguely familiar. I guess put that together with > the fact we know Albus goes there for mead off and on and that is the > "cannon" that the barman is Aberforth. Not real convincing but I can see why > people think that now. > I believe it became 'canon' when JKR answered an interviewer who asked if the bartender was Aberforth with 'good catch' or some such confirmation. The Other Cheryl, poking her head up from lurk mode [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Tue Jan 31 22:33:05 2006 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2006 22:33:05 -0000 Subject: JKR's dealing with emotions /Harry's grief over Sirius - realistic or not? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147380 Karen wrote: > > > > > In fact, I'm really becoming more and more > > amazed at how well she has written about grief without any overtones. > > Lupinlore: > Chuckle. It truly is amazing how people read totally different books, > isn't it? I find her dealing with Harry's grief (or amazing lack > thereof) to be incredibly poor writing and completely unbelievable, > especially after that blow up over Cedric. It would have to be a LOT > more overt than that to be believable. When Harry came up with that > quote about being strong because Sirius wouldn't want him to grieve > overtly I actually laughed out loud in derision. Talk about sweeping > something under the rug for no other reason than to get on with the > plot! Alla: Lupinlore, I want to try to understand where you are coming from, so, let's try to look at Harry's grief over Sirius from a little bit different angle, if you don't mind. :) Forget for a second about Harry's speech about Sirius to Dumbledore, pretend that it does not exist for sake of this argument, because if this scene were the only indicator of Harry's grief, I would absolutely agree with you - I would call the Harry's grief to be handled poorly. I mean, I find it a touching bravado of the teenager, who lost a loved one and tries to be strong, but honestly, if this scene was the only grieving scene in the book, I would not find it realistic and would be annoyed too. My question to you will be, I guess, what do you find problematic in the other scenes, where Harry remembers Sirius or, I think the better wording will be "tries not to think about him, but cannot manage it" In particular, what kind of problems do you see in the scene where Hermione tries to talk to Harry about Tonks and her guilt over Sirius and where Harry does not want to talk about Sirius? What do you find problematic in Harry trying to escape the topic of Sirius? I just find it so very realistic, personally. What kind of problems do you see in one of my very favorite grieving scenes, where Harry remembers that Sirius hated glasses, which Mundungus stole? Why do you find Harry's thoughts at the funeral to be problematic, when he thinks that all his protectors are now gone and this is his fight? I mean not in terms of Hero journey, because that part (Harry has to stand alone) I find problematic as well, but in terms of Harry grieving for everybody who died defending him including Sirius? In short, could you elaborate on why do you think the other scenes of Harry's grief were poorly handled? Thanks, Alla From DaveH47 at mindspring.com Tue Jan 31 22:42:41 2006 From: DaveH47 at mindspring.com (Dave Hardenbrook) Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2006 14:42:41 -0800 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Harry Potter and the Half-Crazed Bureaucracy! In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <1963992324.20060131144241@mindspring.com> No: HPFGUIDX 147382 I read the full article and was "with" the author up until he hinted that Jo is a confirmed _Laissez-Faire_ "pull-yourself-up-by-your- bootstraps" libertarian. Of course I don't know, but I would hope that Jo understands that there are millions of other men, women and children currently suffering in poverty, as she once was, who are *not* going to be lucky enough to become multi-millionaires by writing the most famous children's book series in recent years. -- Dave From bboyminn at yahoo.com Tue Jan 31 22:42:54 2006 From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2006 22:42:54 -0000 Subject: JKR's dealing with emotions - Talking about Death In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147383 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "lupinlore" wrote: > > Chuckle. It truly is amazing how people read totally different > books, isn't it? I find her dealing with Harry's grief ... to > be incredibly poor writing > > ...edited... > > Perhaps it does have to do with emotional styles. I really > don't know. But it certainly is true that, surveying a number > of different boards and forums ..., those three instances in > particular bring a storm of dissent and objection. What do > other people think is the source of this? > > > Lupinlore > bboyminn: I think perhaps the problem is that you are looking for 'movie' solutions to grief, where actors engage in long soliloquies filled with pseudo-emotion and thick Shakespearian accents. But is that how it happens in real-life? Do we really want to 'talk about it'? In real-life there is no satisfaction in death. Mostly we suffer in silence. Monday comes and it's back to work; no one to talk to and nothing to say. Then Tuesday comes and the silent grief still aches inside, but life goes on, reports must be posted, phone calls must be made, lunch must be eaten, and then Wednesday.... In real-life the best comfort is the silent company of our loved ones who are going through the same thing. Our pain is the measure of their grief. So, we sit in silence, and maybe if we are feeling brave, we engage in a reminiscence or two, then fall into silent grief again. No long soliloquies, no thick Shakespearian accents, no satisfing eulogies; just grief and time and silence. Because I really don't see real-life as supportive as TV life where everything is resolved to satisfaction in a half hour or so, I find Harry's silent grief very understandable. They say talking about it makes you feel better, but it doesn't, at least not in the short run. In the short run, talking about it bring up an unbearable pain that no one would willingly face, and we see this with Harry. He can maintain as long as he doesn't talk about it, but as soon as the subject comes up, so does the unbearable pain. So he avoids the subject, and makes peace with the death in question in his own way and in his own time. Perhaps even in the long run, the grief never truly subsides. I've seen World War II veterans in their 70's who have stoically beared their grief in silence for many decades to then be moved to tears by talking about their war experiences. I find this very realistic writing. The beauty of Harry and his story is that I can see real-life in them, and that makes the story far more believable and far more powerful than grand satisfying speeches. Just one man's opinion. Steve/bboyminn From gav_fiji at yahoo.com Tue Jan 31 22:43:19 2006 From: gav_fiji at yahoo.com (Goddlefrood) Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2006 22:43:19 -0000 Subject: Some observations on "The" Phoenix Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147384 One argument that has been used in favour of Dumbledore's making a pact with Severus to be killed or otherwise disguise his killing (I am firmly of the view that Dumbledore is dead) is that Fawkes never stepped in to prevent the AK. It occurred to me while daydreaming in the course of a particularly dull trial that this argument can be rebutted by examination of the Phoenix and its properties. I propose that Fawkes somehow has a link to his feathers. We have seen the feathers used as a warning that he can control (in OotP) and it does not seem unlikely that he is aware of the tail feathers in the wands in which they have been used and also the status of his companion / owner. Mr. Ollivander can help me, as he says on page 65 of the Bloomsbury paperback editio of PS: "I remember every wand I've ever sold, Mr. Potter. Every single wand. It so happens that the phoenix whose tail feather is in your wand, gave another feather ? just one other. It is curious indeed that you should be destined for this wand when its brother ? why its brother gave you that scar." We later find out from Dumbledore (in OotP again I believe) that Fawkes is the Phoenix in question. If, as I say, Fawkes somehow has a connection with his tail feathers in the wands then it makes perfect sense to me that during the fight in the Ministry between Dumbledore and Voldemort that Fawkes would be aware of the danger to his master through both connections. However, where only one connection is present, as on the top of the Tower, Fawkes may not be aware of the danger, and if it is accepted that Dumbledore was not in danger (that is his immortal soul was not in danger) and Fawkes felt this then there would be no other connection. Snape's wand does not contain one of Fawkes' feathers. This would explain why Fawkes did not intervene to swallow the AK curse as he had previously managed in the Ministry. The only other point is that in The White Tomb I am in agreement with those who speculate that the shadowy phoenix will be Dumbledore's message to the Order. Goddlefrood From horridporrid03 at yahoo.com Tue Jan 31 22:51:23 2006 From: horridporrid03 at yahoo.com (horridporrid03) Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2006 22:51:23 -0000 Subject: Will there be an ESE!character in Book 7? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147385 > >>Quick_Silver: > I thought though that HBP was really like "the first part of a two > part book" or something like that. Wouldn't that make Snape > the "betrayal" that everyone is looking for? > Betsy Hp: Well, no it wouldn't. I don't think any of the other books revealed the betrayer or villain in the middle of the story. The *red herring* was handed to us on a silver platter, but the actual bad guy still seemed sweet and innocent (or pathetic, or dead) by the middle act. Just to list it all out: PS/SS: red herring, Snape; villain, Quirrell CoS: red herring, Draco; villain, Ginny/Tom Riddle PoA: red herring, Sirius; villain, Peter Pettigrew GoF: red herring, Karkaroff; villain, Moody/Barty Crouch, Jr. OotP: red herring, Snape; villain, Kreacher If we take HBP as one book in and of itself I guess we'd have to say that the red herring was Draco and the villain was Snape (though that sounds neater than it actually fell out). Mainly because Harry expected Draco to kill Dumbledore and instead (dun-dun-DAH) Snape did it. But if we take HBP as part one of a two parter I think it's safer to put both Snape and Draco as the red herring since they've been so neatly handed to us as the villains. Or maybe Snape as the red herring and Draco as the secondary mystery. Either way, the real villain has yet to be revealed. (DUN-DUN-*DAAHH*!) Betsy Hp From miles at martinbraeutigam.de Tue Jan 31 22:55:44 2006 From: miles at martinbraeutigam.de (Miles) Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2006 23:55:44 +0100 Subject: Regulus Black / Significance of DD & Sirius having References: <002e01c626aa$f19c5c90$b301010a@ConsolidatedTelephone.local> Message-ID: <00ed01c626b9$78258d50$14b2a8c0@rechnerchen> No: HPFGUIDX 147386 > kchuplis: > > You know *I* kept wondering why everyone kept referring to the barman > as > Aberforth and I read the book at least a couple of times. I'm on it > again > and the other night read the meeting section and saw the one little > blurb > where Harry thinks he looks vaguely familiar. I guess put that > together with > the fact we know Albus goes there for mead off and on and that is the > "cannon" that the barman is Aberforth. Not real convincing but I can > see why > people think that now. Miles: It's secondary canon ;). ES: What on earth was Aberforth Dumbledore doing with those goats? [Big laughs from all] JKR: Your guess is as good as mine! [Evil laugh!] MA: Excellent. And Dumbledore makes a little joke about him in this one, about knowing people in bars. JKR: Yes, absolutely. Yeah, that's right. And you of course see Aberforth very briefly. http://www.quick-quote-quill.org/articles/2005/0705-tlc_mugglenet-anelli-3.htm Why is the barman of the Hog's Head vaguely familiar to Harry? Is he Dumbledore's brother? Ooh-you are getting good. Why do you think that it is Aberforth? [Audience member: Various clues. He smells of goats and he looks a bit like Dumbledore]. I was quite proud of that clue. That is all that I am going to say. [Laughter]. Well yes, obviously. I like the goat clue-I sniggered to myself about that one. http://www.quick-quote-quill.org/articles/2004/0804-ebf.htm From rdoliver30 at yahoo.com Tue Jan 31 19:28:45 2006 From: rdoliver30 at yahoo.com (lupinlore) Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2006 19:28:45 -0000 Subject: Regulus Black / Significance of DD & Sirius having In-Reply-To: <20060131185608.69284.qmail@web33206.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147387 > tropicwhale: > Personally I think she had to kill off both Sirius and Albus, after > all they were father figures for Harry, and he did lean on them for > support. Killing them off forces him to stand on his own. And what's so great about that? Seriously, I've never understood the whole "Harry must stand on his own," thing. It seems a slavish service to the hackneyed Hero's Journey. I do understand it better, however, now that JKR has discussed her death neurosis. She is attempting, through Harry, to grapple with something she finds terribly important and frightening. Unfortunately, to those of us who don't share her neurosis and are tired of constant harping on the Hero's Journey, the deaths of Dumbledore and Sirius were pointless and annoying. Lupinlore From drednort at alphalink.com.au Tue Jan 31 23:22:22 2006 From: drednort at alphalink.com.au (Shaun Hately) Date: Wed, 01 Feb 2006 10:22:22 +1100 Subject: [HPforGrownups] JKR's dealing with emotions (was Re: The importance of death /Harry and Cedric) In-Reply-To: References: <00a401c62674$277a5bf0$b301010a@ConsolidatedTelephone.local> Message-ID: <43E08BDE.29579.8A7C9F@drednort.alphalink.com.au> No: HPFGUIDX 147388 On 31 Jan 2006 at 19:20, lupinlore wrote: > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Karen" wrote: > > > > > In fact, I'm really becoming more and more > > amazed at how well she has written about grief without any overtness. > > > > Chuckle. It truly is amazing how people read totally different books, > isn't it? I find her dealing with Harry's grief (or amazing lack > thereof) to be incredibly poor writing and completely unbelievable, > especially after that blow up over Cedric. It would have to be a LOT > more overt than that to be believable. When Harry came up with that > quote about being strong because Sirius wouldn't want him to grieve > overtly I actually laughed out loud in derision. Talk about sweeping > something under the rug for no other reason than to get on with the > plot! > > But that just brings up a question of JKR's handling of strong emotion > in general. What does she do well, and what does she do poorly? > CAPSLOCK Harry was over the top in the view of many readers, many > others don't find her handling of his grief (or lack thereof) over > Sirius to be believable (especially given CAPSLOCK Harry in OOTP), and > her handling of romance brought a chorus of rasberries. > > Perhaps it does have to do with emotional styles. I really don't > know. But it certainly is true that, surveying a number of different > boards and forums (particularly HPfGU, Sugarquill, and Fictionalley, > along with numerous fanfic chat sites), those three instances in > particular bring a storm of dissent and objection. What do other > people think is the source of this? I think it really comes down to the fact that many people try and place themselves into Harry's shoes and think about how they would feel and react - and then they make the jump into thinking that the way they would feel and react is somehow the 'right' way, and so if JKR doesn't present Harry in that way, they think she's got it wrong. I'm afraid you're going to be treated to yet another account of the parallels I see between aspects of Harry's life and my own - but in this case, I think it's particularly relevant. I place Sirius' death as having occurred around the 18th June 1996. This seems to be consistent with the Lexicon dates, but they seem to have the same problems working it out precisely I do - it could be up to a few weeks later. It occurs near the end of Harry's year at school, and so we get to see his grieving or lack thereof mostly in his following year. Harry was born 31st July 1980 - so at the time of Sirius' death he is aged approximately 15 years, 10 months, and 18 days old - possibly a little older, but this is the ball park figure in my view. My father died after a very short illness on the 10th December 1990. I was born on 20th January 1975. At the time of my father's death, I was aged 15 years, 10 months, and 20 days old. He died shortly after the end of my school year (about a week after if I recall correctly), and so I was dealing with my grief as my following school year started. And the way Harry is depicted as dealing with Sirius' death in the Half Blood Prince rings very true for me. Because it is very similar to the way I dealt with my father's death. I wasn't all that obviously grieving to other people. To the extent that some people got very worried about me. They felt my reaction was inappropriate and unusual. Maybe they were right about it being unusual - I do think it was somewhat unhealthy looking back on it, but it was genuine. Was I grieving? Yes, I was. But it wasn't all that obvious to those outside me and even internally I kept things under a lot of control? Why? Partly because that was the way I was. Abuse I had suffered earlier in my childhood, had left me with issues showing emotion - and given the neglect Harry suffered at the hands of the Dursley's, I think he had this considerably worse than me. Partly it came from a deliberate decision on my part, that I didn't have time to fall apart. I had far more important things to think about - in my case, it was my schoolwork - this was the first year of a new education system in my state and good performance in the last two years of your schooling was critical to your future study options, and this was my second last year. I didn't feel I had time to fall apart. I don't think Harry cares as much about his schooling as I did - but he *certainly* is in a position where he knows he has something important to do and where he, I believe, could easily arrive at the same conclusion - I don't have time to fall apart. Thirdly... "'But while I was at the Dursleys'... interrupted Harry, his voice growing stronger, 'I realized I cant shut myself away or - or crack up. Sirius wouldn't have wanted that, would he?" That statement rings so true to me. Because I came to the same conclusion, about two weeks after my father died, just before Christmas. That he wouldn't have wanted me to fall apart. "Remember me when I am gone away Gone far away into the silent land When you can no more hold me by the hand Nor I half turn to go yet turning stay Remember me when no more day by day You tell me of our future that you planned Only remember me; you understand It will be late to counsel then or pray Yet if you should forget me for a while And afterwards remember, do not grieve For if the darkness and corruption leave A vestige of the thoughts that once I had Better by far you should forget and smile Than that you should remember and be sad" Harry honours Sirius' memory by living his life. And that's important for another reason: "He was far from blaming her for Sirius's death; it was no more her fault than anyone else's (and much less than his), but he did not like talking about Sirius if he could avoid it." And much less than his... Harry feels himself partly responsible for his Godfather's death. Believe me, I can *really* relate to that type of feeling. I considered - and I still consider - that I helped kill my father. And when you feel that type of responsibility, I think it probably does change the way you grieve in a lot of cases. You feel an even greater duty than normal to get on with living your life for the person who died. Harry grieves in his own way. He's not particularly demonstrative. He shows his grief at odd moments, he lets it out occasionally, maybe when he has to. But most of the time he gets on with living. I can relate because that is what I did at something of the same age, under some sligtly similar circumstances, somewhat. In my view, JKR nails it. But that's because her view matches mine. At least I think it does. Yours Without Wax, Dreadnought Shaun Hately | www.alphalink.com.au/~drednort/thelab.html (ISTJ) | drednort at alphalink.com.au | ICQ: 6898200 "You know the very powerful and the very stupid have one thing in common. They don't alter their views to fit the facts. They alter the facts to fit the views. Which can be uncomfortable if you happen to be one of the facts that need altering." The Doctor - Doctor Who: The Face of Evil Where am I: Frankston, Victoria, Australia From nrenka at yahoo.com Tue Jan 31 23:20:41 2006 From: nrenka at yahoo.com (nrenka) Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2006 23:20:41 -0000 Subject: Will there be an ESE!character in Book 7? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147389 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "horridporrid03" wrote: > But if we take HBP as part one of a two parter I think it's safer > to put both Snape and Draco as the red herring since they've been > so neatly handed to us as the villains. Or maybe Snape as the red > herring and Draco as the secondary mystery. Either way, the real > villain has yet to be revealed. (DUN-DUN-*DAAHH*!) What I love about this argument is that its signal strength and weakness are the exact same thing: the continuation of a pattern. I snipped the chart above which argues in every book, there's a red herring and then an ultimate reversal. Ergo, Snape at the end of HBP is a total red herring, and there's a reversal, with some ESE!ness to be revealed. I don't believe in the necessity of ESE!ness, to get that one out of the way. We've done the 'unknown and unsuspected traitor within the Order' thing the first time around, and if Dumbledore has made a mistake in trusting Snape it's an entirely different setup, thematically and mechanically. That said, I don't find the 'red herrings' in OotP or HBP to be like the red herrings in the earlier books. The first four feel very different than the past two, partly because of their self-contained nature and their more standard framework behind the plot (the school structure). Things seem to change pretty profoundly when Voldemort comes onto the scene. (Coincidentally, it's probably not surprising that many of the very upset fans this time around claim to have begun their disillusionment after OotP.) JKR's given us the signs that book 7 is going to break the standard framework of the school year wide open to accomodate the Quest Model, which plays by very different rules. And there's also a possible artistic consideration; unbroken patterns tend to make for weak literature. It's often a tactic to construct what seems like such a nice consistent model, for the BANG when it breaks. Personally, I don't understand why people are wanting to shove all of the BANG over onto book 7. It seems a perpetual delaying tactic to dispute the solving of mysteries that one would rather see continued, or thought the solution had holes. Alas, holes to us are often not holes to another reader. I'll give half odds on some revision/BANG, but half odds on book 7 dealing with the ramifications of the very real and devastating BANG- y events of book 6, rather than it reconning or profoundly respinning them. It's a good option to keep open, at least. -Nora wonders if the FEATHERBOAS are disappointed yet, either From Sherry at PebTech.net Tue Jan 31 23:32:29 2006 From: Sherry at PebTech.net (Sherry) Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2006 23:32:29 -0000 Subject: Will there be an ESE!character in Book 7? In-Reply-To: <43DEEB7E.50804@sprynet.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 147390 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Bart Lidofsky wrote: > Bart: > Ah, but a lot of pain and frustration creates a weakness that can be > taken advantage of. Make Neville think that he is going to get revenge > on Voldemort, while corrupting him one step at a time. What have the > good guys done for him? His parents are insane shells, and his > grandmother is a domineering bitch. Even his classmates have little > respect for him. What have the good guys done for him? Well, I'd say that Harry helped to save Neville's life during the MoM battle in OOtP. Lupin (and I firmly believe he's fighting for the right!) broke the spell which one of the Death Eaters had put on him. If any of the Death Eaters has been trying to trick or lure Neville into betraying Harry, I didn't detect any sign of it here. The single biggest element--the formative event--that has shaped much of Neville's life was the attack on his parents, when followers of Voldemort tortured them past the limits on their minds. It may be just my impression from the books, but I have a sense that this helped to make his grandmother the overbearing person she is. If anything, I expect that Neville's personal "warning system" is at high alert against any contact from Voldemort's supporters. He showed in OOtP, and in the battle at the end of HBP, that he may be a much stronger opponent than first impressions may suggest. Amontillada