HBP's Potion book

[amanitamuscaria1]

No: HPFGUIDX 155603

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Ceridwen" <ceridwennight at ...> 
wrote:
>
> AmanitaMuscaria:
> <snip>
> > > The other point is that there are familial resemblances in 
> > handwriting. This may be even more emphasized if the student were 
> > initially home-taught, as I assume most Hogwarts pupils from 
> > wizarding families are. Snape _may_ have been, by his mother, and 
> may
> > further have modelled himself and his handwriting on the family 
> > member he feels proud of, thus the Half-blood Prince
> > > Just some thoughts. 
> 
> Carol:
> > So you're saying that Eileen Prince may have written "This book
> > belongs to the Half-Blood Prince" in the cramped, minuscule 
writing
> > used throughout the book?
> *(snip)*
> > Or are you saying that the invented spells are Teen!Severus's, 
but 
> the
> > potion hints are his mother's, despite his known proficiency at
> > potions and despite being in the same handwriting in the same 
book,
> > apparently identical to the writing on his DADA exam, which JKR 
> would
> > have no reason to mention if it weren't a clue?
> *(snip)*
> > Carol, not understanding why anyone would want to make Eileen the 
> HBP
> > rather than a red herring or what purpose would be served by 
doing 
> so
> 
> Ceridwen:
> I thought that Amanita was saying that the writing in the book 
could 
> possibly be by two people, one of whom was taught to write by the 
> other and so both handwritings look alike to Harry, who is no 
expert 
> on handwriting.  If this was Eileen's book, and she was good at 
> Potions as Severus was in school, the hints could well be hers...
> 
> ...except for what Slughorn says to Snape at the Christmas party, 
> that Harry did better at the Draught of Living Death on his first 
try 
> than even Snape had done, which means that the hints and 
corrections 
> were not in the book when Snape entered sixth-year Potions, or at 
> least that's how it seems to me.
> 
> Ceridwen.
>
AmanitaMuscaria now - As Ceridwen puts it so well, I was not saying 
Eileen was 'the Half-Blood Prince', merely that it was her book 
originally, and there may be two persons' work in it. I was answering 
cass_da_sweet's note, and going off on a tangent. Ron can't read the 
handwriting at all, so takes the unwritten-in book. Hermione thinks 
the handwriting is a girl's - presumably, then, she can read it, or 
some of it? It may not be important, just that some time ago there 
was a discussion that Harry may have been the only one (apart from 
Snape, of course) who could read it, and that the book had been 
bewitched (bewizarded, surely?) so this would happen.
Cheers. AmanitaMuscaria